Top

INDEX
July 4- December 26, 1955
V,\. ^
sfe ETtno sr
Corrections in Volume XXXIII
The Editor of the Bulletin wishes to call atten-
tion to the following errors :
September 5 : page 398, right-hand column, ISth
line from the top, 1952 should read :
-1962"
September 19 : page 457, right-hand column, the
20th line from the top should begin :
"The following list of 19 other Americans . . . ."
The list which follows should include the name of
Mrs. Homer V. Bradshaw.
INDEX
Volume XXXIII: Numbers 836-861, July 4-December 26, 1955
Adenauer, Konrad :
Geneva Heads of Government Conference, letter to
President Eisenhower, 259
German vested assets in U.S., return of, correspondence
with Secretary Dulles, 973m
Leadership in Germany and cooperation with West, 14,
44, 48, 49, 93, 525
Negotiations with Soviet Union, 494
Administration, Deputy Under Secretary of State for,
delegation of functions and authorities to, 909
Administrative Tribunal, U.N., review of judgments by
International Court of Justice, statements of U.S.
position regarding procedure (Merrow) and text of
General Assembly resolution, 938
Aerial inspection and exchange of military blueprints,
President Eisenhower's proposals. See under Dis-
armament
Afghanistan :
International Bank, articles of agreement, 164
International Monetary Fund, articles of agreement, 164
Soviet economic activities in, 342, 343
Africa (see also individual countries) :
Foreign Relations, volume on, published, 165
Mutual security program in, 32, 266
Vice President Nixon, visit of, 380
West Africa, problems of self-government, 159
Agricultural surpluses, U.S., use in overseas program :
Agreements with —
Austria, 124; Brazil, 898, 932; Colombia, 85, 86;
Ecuador, 676, 678; Egypt, 1086; France, 406, 998;
Greece, 100, 210 ; Guatemala, 196 ; India, 617 ; Israel,
86, 10S6 ; Italy, 225, 249 ; Japan, 86, 577 ; Libya, 263 ;
Pakistan, 678 ; Peru, 210, 623 ; Spain, 862 ; Thailand,
164 ; Turkey, 998 ; Yugoslavia, 86
Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act :
Amendment, statement (Eisenhower), 362
President's report to Congress (Jan.-June 1955), 197
Disposal problems, 713, 849, 850, 930, 937
FOA sales proceeds chart, 30
Mutual security program :
Report to Congress (Jan.-June 1955) , 431
Report to President (Jan. 1953-June 1955), 267, 270
Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act. See
under Agricultural surpluses
Agriculture :
Cooperative program agreements with —
Dominican Republic, 909
Libya, 1086
Panama, extending 1952 agreement, 932
Imports, restrictions on, U.S. report to 10th session of
GATT, 1019
Plant protection convention, international, 85, 589, 931
Soviet Union, exchange of agricultural delegations with
U.S., 151, 689
World agriculture, problems in, statement (Benson) , 934
Agriculture, Department of, personnel assigned abroad,
Executive order concerning, 306
Aid to foreign countries. See Economic and technical aid
and Military assistance
Air defense. See National defense
Air transport. See Aviation
Aircraft. See Aviation
Albania, admission to U.N., 1068, 1070, 1071«.
Aldrich, Winthrop W., 651, 793
Algerian question in U.N., proposed inscription on General
Assembly agenda :
U.S. position, statements : Dulles, 605 ; Lodge, 546, 582
Withdrawal of French delegation from General Assem-
bly, address and statement : Dulles, 605 ; Wilcox 740
Decision to omit from agenda, statement (Lodge), 992
Ali, Mohammed, 916
Al-Khayall, Abdullah, 361
Allen, George V., 604, 683, 786
American-Israeli friendship, address (Brownell), 97
American Republics. See Latin America and individual
countries
Amity, economic relations, and consular rights treaty with
Iran, 367, 369
Antarctica, expeditions for International Geophysical
Year, 990
Antilles, Netherlands, double taxation convention, U.S.-
Netherlands, 37, 38, 290
Antitrust policies, relation to foreign trade and invest-
ment, address (Kalijarvi), 538
ANZUS Council, meeting and statement, 357, 534
Arab-Israeli dispute :
Arms supply to Middle East. See Arms supply
Egypt, hostilities with Israel :
Address (Wilcox), 904
Security Council resolution, 459
U.S. position, statements, 786 ; Lodge, 458
Refugee problem :
Addresses (Dulles), 379, 526
U.S. aid, 33
U.N. role in truce negotiations, 741
U.S. position, address and statements: Allen, 684;
Brownell, 99; Dulles, 378, 421, 525, 1009, 1010;
Eisenhower, 845 ; Murphy, 493
Arbitral Commission on property rights and interests in
Germany, charter of, 442, 813
Architects, American Institute of, planning of Berlin con-
ference hall, 302
Argentina :
Economic outlook, address (Kalijarvi), 1062
Geneva conventions (1949), reservation to, 74
Telecommunication convention, international, and addi-
tional protocols (1952), 368
Tung oil, limit on export to U.S., discontinuance, 792
U.S.-Argentine relations, statement (Dulles), 605
Index, July to December 1955
1091
Argentina — Continued
U.S.private capital, remittances for earnings on invest-
ments, 462
U.S. recognition of new government, 560
Armaments (see also Disarmament) :
International control of:
Address and statement (Dulles), 9, 53
NAC position on, 1047
WEU system of, 417
Near East. See Arms supply
Soviet surplus, question of disposal, 601, 879
U.S. policy, address (Eisenhower), 133
Armed forces :
Courts for armed forces of Canada and U.K. in U.S.,
proclamation discontinuing, 361
Prisoners of war. See Prisoners of war
Protocol on termination of occupation regime in Federal
Republic of Germany, 406
Reduction in and exchange of information concerning.
See Disarmament
Soviet proposed reduction, statement (Dulles), 338
Soviet troops in Rumania, 339
Armed forces, U.S. :
In France, relations with local communities, address
(Dillon), 1014
In Japan, joint statement, U.S.-Japan, 420
Members dying in France, agreement with France re-
garding burial, 210
Military missions, U.S., abroad. See Military missions
Reduction, statement (Dulles), 830
Treatment under NATO status of forces agreement,
statement (Murphy), 178
Armistice agreement, Korea. See under Korea
Arms supply to Middle East :
Egypt, arms purchase from Czechoslovakia, address and
statements : Allen, 684 ; Dulles, 604, 6S9
Israel, request to buy arms from U.S., statement (Dul-
les), 965
U.S. policy, address, letter, and statement: Allen, 685;
Dulles, 004 ; Eisenhower, 894
U.S.-U.K. joint statement, 560
Arsenal, agreement with Korea for establishment of facili-
ties for, 164
Artibonite Valley, agreement with Haiti for development,
369
Asia, South Asia, and Southeast Asia (see also individual
countries) :
Atomic energy center for research and training, U.S.
proposal for, 749, 1010
Communist aggression in, addresses: Dulles, 9; Robert-
son, 295, 692
Economic development :
Colombo Plan. See Colombo Plan
Progress and problems, address (Kalijarvi), 1059,
1063
Manila Pact, address (Dulles), 526
Southeast Asia Treaty Organization. See Southeast
Asia Treaty Organization
U.S. mutual security program in, reports:
Jan. 1953-June 1955, report to President (Stassen),
266, 269, 271
Asia, South Asia, and Southeast Asia — Continued
U.S. mutual security program in, reports — Continued
Jan. 1-June 30, 1955, report to Congress (Eisen-
hower), 429
June 8, 1955, statement (Stassen), 31, 32
U.S. policy in, addresses and statements : Dulles, 965 ;
Robertson, 695 ; Young, 843
Assistant Secretary-Controller, Department of State, dele-
gation of functions and authorities to, 910
Astronomical Union, International, U.S. delegation to 9th
General Assembly, 325
Aswan Dam, Egypt, financial support by U.S., U.K., and
World Bank, discussions, 1050
Atomic energy, cooperation regarding atomic information :
Mutual defense agreements with Canada and U.K. for
exchange of information:
Letters (Eisenhower, Wilson), 59
Entry into force, 290
Texts, 60
North Atlantic Treaty, agreement between parties for
cooperation, 442, 478, 623, 813, 931, 1024, 1086
Atomic energy, international control of atomic weapons.
See Disarmament
Atomic energy, nuclear explosions :
Explosion in Soviet Union, 916
Soviet proposed suspension of tests, 964
Atomic energy, peaceful uses of :
Addresses, statements, etc. : Baker, 316 ; Dulles, 527 ;
Eisenhower, 787; Hays, 714; Holland, 598; Libby,
381 ; Pastore, 660, 1030 ; Stassen, 536 ; Wilcox, 487,
743, 900
Agreements with —
Belgium, 37, 5S, 478 ; Brazil, 478 ; Canada, 37, 58, 290
Chile, 55w, 327; China, 55m, 210; Colombia, 210
Denmark, 249 ; Greece, 55m, 290 ; Israel, 164 ; Italy
290 ; Japan, 55n, 909, 998 ; Korea, 55m ; Lebanon, 210
Netherlands, 55», 210; Pakistan, 55m, 328; Peru
55m ; Philippines, 55m, 249 ; Portugal, 55m, 249
Spain, 210 ; Sweden, 55m ; Switzerland, 210 ; Turkey
55 ; U.K., 38, 58, 290, 862 ; Uruguay, 55m ; Venezuela,
55m, 210
Asia, economic and social progress through use of the
atom, statement (Hollister), 747
Colombo Plan center for research and training, U.S.
proposal for, 749, 1010
Commemorative stamp, remarks (Eisenhower) upon
issuance 217
International Atomic Energy Agency. See Atomic En-
ergy Agency, International
Medical facilities in U.S., tour by foreign doctors, 264
Radiation effects on human health :
Address and statement : Dulles, 528 ; Pastore, 1031
U.N. proposed committee to coordinate and dissemin-
ate information on, text of resolution and state-
ments (Wadsworth), S51
U.S. proposal for international collation of data on, 54
U.S. request for item on agenda of General Assem-
bly, 365
Soviet proposals at Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting,
779
Technical conferences. See Atomic energy, technical
conferences
1092
Department of State Bulletin
Atomic energy, peaceful uses of — Continued
Training programs, U.S., 382, 3S3, 663
U.N. action, 1954, report to Congress (Eisenhower), 385,
388
U.N. General Assembly agenda item, U.S. request for, 384
Atomic energy, technical conferences :
U.N. conference on peaceful uses of atomic energy
(first) :
Addresses : Libby, 3S1 ; Lodge, 738 ; Phillips, 256
Message from President Eisenhower, 300
Procedure of meetings, delegates commended for
promptness, 720
Results, address (Strauss), 555
U.S. delegation, 64, 243
U.N. conference on peaceful uses of atomic energy
(second) :
Proposals concerning, addresses and statements :
Dulles, 527 : Eisenhower, 381 ; Pastore, 662, 797, 799,
802, 803 ; Strauss, 381
U.N draft resolutions, 665 (text), 801 (text), 802, 803
Atomic Energy Agency, International, establishment :
Address and statements: Pastore, 660, 662, 1030;
Phillips, 256
Draft statute :
Statements in General Assembly (Pastore), 662, 796
Text, 666
12-power meeting to consider, 79S, 800
U.N. draft resolution, 796, S01 (text)
Relationship to U.N., 324, 488, 798, 799, 801, 804
U.S. reply to Soviet note, 264
Australia :
ANZUS Council, meeting and statement, 357, 534
Bills of lading convention (1924), 441
Civil aviation convention, international, protocol relat-
ing to sessions of ICAO, 123
GATT, declaration on continued application of sched-
ules, 164
GATT, rectifications and modifications to annexes and
text of schedules, 4th protocol, 368
Visas, nonimmigrant, agreement with U.S. concerning
reciprocal changes, 590
Austria :
Communist domination, resistance to, address (E.
Dulles), 423
Consular districts, U.S., establishment of, 442
Neutrality, Austrian, U.S. recognition of, U.S. and Aus-
trian notes, 1011
Property of U.N. and U.S. nationals. See under Claims
Tariff concessions to U.S., request for renegotiation, 114
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Agricultural commodities, agreement with U.S., 124
Educational exchange program, agreement with U.S.
amending 1950 agreement, 249
GATT, proces-verbal extending validity of 1953 dec-
laration regulating commercial relations between
contracting parties and Japan, 164
Road traffic convention, 909
State treaty. See Austrian state treaty
U.S. Government property in Austria, agreement with
U.S. regarding disposition, 677
U.N., admission to, 1067, 106S, 1070, 1071rc
Austria — Continued
U.S. relations with since the war, address (Elbrick)
upon celebration of independence, 788
U.S. Secretary of State, visit, 733, 789
Austrian state treaty :
Address (Dulles), 524
Current actions on, 37, 85, 86, 94, 209, 327, 702, 1086
Property of U.S., U.N., and British nationals in Austria,
agreements concerning, 760, 967 (texts), 1024
U.S. ratification and proclamation by President, 94, 327
Auto travel, international. See Travel
Aviation :
Aerial inspection proposals of President Eisenhower.
See under Disarmament
Air routes established by 1949 air transport agreement
with Canada, review of, 533
Attacks on aircraft :
Bulgarian destruction of Israeli aircraft, 263, 354
Communist attack on U.N. training plane in Korea,
U.N. Command protest, 396
Soviet attack on U.S. plane in Bering Sea, statements
(Dulles) , 50, 52 ; U.S. note and Soviet memorandum,
100
Soviet destruction of U.S. B-29 off Hokkaido (1952),
U.S. application to International Court of Justice
and Soviet note, 65
Ethiopia, U.S. loan for expansion of facilities, 617
International Civil Aviation Organization. See Inter-
national Civil Aviation Organization
Soviet Union, Western proposal at Geneva for reciprocal
civil aviation rights with, 776, 878
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Air Force mission (U.S.), agreements with — ■
Cuba, extending 1950 agreement, 38
Paraguay, amending 1943 agreement, 406
Air service agreement with U.K., amending 1946
agreement, 406
Air transport agreements with —
China, amending annex of 1946 agreement, 590
Germany, 145, 164
Syria (1947), 86
Air transportation, international convention for uni-
fication of rules, 549
Aircraft, imported, arrangement with Netherlands
relating to certificates of airworthiness for, 909
Aircraft assembly or manufacture in Japan, agree-
ment with Japan, 210
Army, Navy, and military aviation missions, agree-
ment with Peru for performance of duties of mem-
bers of, 909
Civil aircraft, agreement with U.K. for use of facil-
ities in the Bahamas long-range proving ground, 290
Civil aviation convention, international, 123
Damages to property of Japanese nationals, agree-
ment with Japan for payment, 99S
Jet engines, agreement with Italy for repair facil-
ities, 249
Rights in aircraft, convention on international recog-
nition of, 998
Baghdad Pact :
Iranian adherence, 653
Index, July to December 1955
1093
Baghdad Pact — Continued
Pakistani adherence, 534
U.S. continued support, statement (Gallman) before
Baghdad Pact Council meeting, 926
U.S. military and political liaison, U.S. observers, 895
Bahama Islands long-range proving ground facilities,
U.S.-U.K. agreement for use by civil aircraft, 290
Baker, John C, 109, 312
Balewa, Malam Abubakar Tafawa, 495
Bank for Reconstruction and Development. See Interna-
tional Bank
Barley, U.S. import quotas, expiration of, 543
Barnes, William, 549
Bases, U.S. military, in Spain, 31
Baffle Berres, Luis, 338
Battle Act. See Mutual Defense Assistance Control Act
Beam, Jacob D., 910
Beaulac, Willard L., 335
Belgium :
Agricultural imports, restrictions on, 1019
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 37, 58,
478
Atomic information, agreement for cooperation between
parties to NAT, 931
Customs convention on temporary importation of pri-
vate road vehicles, 289
Customs facilities for touring, convention on, 2S9
European Migration, Intergovernmental Committee for,
constitution of, 210
GATT, compensatory concessions from U.S., 226, 228, 231
Korea, participation of Belgian forces in U.N. operations,
agreement to pay U.S. for logistic support, 189, 210
Mutual defense assistance agreement with U.S., 550
Telecommunication convention, international, 516
U.S. nationals, interment of, agreement extending 1947
agreement, 368
Bell, Laird, 673, 906, 948
Benson, Ezra Taft, 276, 934
Bering Sea, Soviet attack on U.S. aircraft in :
Statements (Dulles), 50, 52
U.S. note and Soviet memorandum, 100
Berlin, Germany :
Boundary of Greater Berlin, protocol with U.S.S.R. de-
fining location of, 165
Communist domination, resistance to, address (E. Dul-
les), 424
Conference hall, construction of, 302
Freedom Bell, 5th anniversary of installation, message
(Eisenhower), 734, 916
Quadripartite status, U.S., French, and British position,
1013
Soviet obligations to West regarding access to, 1010
U.S. Congressmen, detention in Soviet sector, U.S. pro-
test against, letter (Dasher), and note and state-
ment (Conant), 1012
U.S. policy toward, 17, 425
Bernbaum, Maurice M., 478
Bhabha, Homi J., 720
Bicycles, U.S. tariff increase, 399, 794, 795, 930, 976, 977
Big Four conference. See Geneva Heads of Government
Conference
Bills of lading, international convention for unification of
rules relating to (1924), 441
Binational cultural centers overseas, U.S. assistance to,
article (E. R. Murphy), 358
Bipartisan foreign policy :
Meeting of President with congressional leaders, 1049
Statement (Dulles), 965
Bishop, Max Waldo, 998
Bissonnette, Rev. Georges, 102
Blackboard Jungle, question of showing at Venice Film
Festival, letter (Mcllvaine), 537
Blaustein, Jacob, 628, 762, 811, 1074
B'nai B'rith, 834
Boland, Rep. Edward D., 1012»
Bolivia :
Army mission agreement with U.S. extending 1942
agreement, 550
Economic outlook, address (Kalijarvi), 1061
Guaranties agreement with U.S. under Mutual Security
Act, 769
Road service, agreement with U.S. for establishment of,
442
Bonbright, James C. H., 721, 860
Bond, Niles W., 369
Books, U.S., need for increased distribution abroad, 616
Boris, Archibishop, 102, 784, 888
Bowie, Robert R., 442
Brazil :
Agricultural surpluses, agreement with U.S. for pur-
chase, 898, 932
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 478
Economic outlook, address (Kalijarvi), 1062
Education, industrial, agreement with U.S. extending
1950 agreement, 249
GATT, 4th protocol of rectifications and modifications,
368
Geneva conventions (1949), reservations to, 74
Industrial apprenticeship, cooperative program of,
agreement with U.S. extending 1952 agreement, 368
Joint Brazil-U.S. Military anil Defense Commissions,
continuation agreement, 769
Oil shale study, agreement with U.S. extending agree-
ment for technical assistance, S61
Uranium resources of Brazil, agreement with U.S. for
cooperative program for reconnaissance, 516
Brentano, Heinrich von, 560
British Cameroons, progress toward self-rule, 159
British Togoland, future relationship to Gold Coast, 159
Broadcasting, Western proposals at Geneva Foreign Min-
isters Meeting for exchange of radio broadcasts with
Soviet Union, and Soviet rejection, 776, 877, 880
Brokenburr, Robert L., 810
Brown, Winthrop G., 516
Brownell, Herbert, Jr., 97, 179, 180
Brownell, Samuel M., 575
Buchanan, Wiley T., Jr., 478, 516
Bulganin, Nikolai A. :
Asian tour, 1007, 1056
Disarmament proposals, 644, 705, 70S
Bulgaria :
Assets in U.S., disposition of, 845
1094
Department of State Bulletin
Bulgaria — Continued
Customs tariffs, international union for publication of,
protocol modifying 1890 convention, 769
Israeli aircraft, destruction, U.S. protest and Bulgarian
note of regret, 263, 354
Petkov, Nikola, anniversary of death, 529
United Nations, admission to, 1068, 1070, 1071m
Burma:
GATT, signature to declaration and protocols, 931, 932
Gift to U.S. for sacrifices during Burma campaign, 96
Postal convention, universal, 769
Prime Minister, visit to U.S., 50, 95
U.N. role in peaceful settlement in, 741
Butterworth, W. Walton, 643
Butz, Earl L., 543
Byrnes, James F., 46
Calendar of international meetings, 35, 204, 403, 580, 763,
932
Cambodia :
Communist threat of subversion, 694
Military assistance agreement with U.S., 290
Religious leader, visit to U.S., 896
United Nations, admission to, 1067, 1068, 1070, 1071n
World Meteorological Organization convention, 909
Cameroons, British, progress toward self-rule, 159
Canada :
Air routes established by 1949 air transport agreement
with U.S., review of, 533
Columbia River power development, proposals for, 980
Courts for armed forces in U.S., discontinuance, 361
Distant early warning line installations, joint U.S.-
Canadian inspection, 495
Fraser River salmon fisheries, destructive effect of
power projects on, report of International Pacific
Salmon Fisheries Commission, 984, 985
Fur seals, North Pacific, conference for conservation of,
437
St. Croix River Basin, investigation of water resources,
21
Trade and Economic Affairs, Joint U.S.-Canadian Com-
mittee, 2d meeting :
Address (Stuart), 928
Delegations, functions, and joint communique, 274, 576
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 37,
58, 290
Atomic information, agreement between parties to
NAT for cooperation, 478
Atomic information, exchange of for mutual defense,
agreement with U.S., letters (Eisenhower, Wilson),
text, and entry into force, 59, 290
Communication facilities in the vicinity of Stephen-
ville, New foundland, agreement with U.S. amend-
ing 1952 agreement, 86
Distant early warning system, agreement with U.S.,
22
GATT, compensatory concessions from U.S., 226, 228,
231
GATT, declaration on continued application of sched-
ules, 164
GATT, protocols amending, 164
Canada — Continued
Treaties, agreements, etc. — Continued
Great Lakes fisheries convention with U.S., 678, 770
Petroleum products pipeline, construction, agreement
with U.S., 623
St. Lawrence seaway, relocation of Roosevelt Bridge
span, agreement with U.S., 932, 978
Vessels, naval, agreement with U.S. for furnishing
supplies and services to, 327
U.S. relations with, addresses : Murphy, 411 ; Stuart, 927
Captive peoples :
Europe, Eastern and Central, question of restoration of
sovereignty, 172, 219, 561, 562
Sacrifices of, address (E. Dulles), 423
Caribbean Commission, U.S. delegation to 21st meeting, 988
Carpenter, Isaac W., Jr., 442
Cartels, effects on international trade, address (Kali-
jarvi), 539
Cartography, 7th Pan American Consultation on, U.S.
delegation, 288
Castillo-Armas, Col. Carlos, 599, 790
Censorship of press and radio, Soviet, 877
Central Intelligence Agency, functions, address (A.
Dulles), 602
Ceylon, admission to U.N., 1067, 1068, 1070, 1071»
Chaco Road, Paraguay, construction of, U.S. training
program, 177
Charter of the United Nations. See United Nations
Charter
Chief Joseph Dam award, 794, 795
Child feeding programs, agreement with Italy, 225, 249
Children, employment at sea, convention fixing minimum
age, 589, 1024
Children's Fund, U.N.:
Appointment of U.S. alternate representative on Execu-
tive Board, 316
U.S. contribution to, 513
Chile :
Economic outlook, address (Kalijarvi), 1061
Fishery resources of southeastern Pacific, conservation,
meeting with U.S., Ecuador, and Peru, 3S4, 513, 1025
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55n,
327
GATT, protocol of terms of accession of Japan, 164
GATT, protocols amending, 368
Technical assistance to medium and small industry,
agreement with U.S. amending 1952 agreement, 164,
1086
Trade Cooperation, Organization for, agreement on,
36S
China (see also China, Communist, and China, Republic
of), Soviet investment enterprises in, 344
China, Communist :
Aggression in Asia, addresses (Dulles), 9, 526
Civilians in U.S., release of. See under Geneva ambas-
sadorial talks
Economic position, address (Kalijarvi), 1059
Formosa Straits, situation in, 492
Military strength and political influence in Far East,
article (Lindbeck), 751
Propaganda "peace" appeals, 82
Index, July to December 7955
1095
China, Communist — Continued
Soviet support, 492
Taiwan area, building of airfields in, statement
(Dulles), 1009
Trade with free world, statement (DeLany), 918
U.N. representation, question of, 544, 737, 744, 1011
U.S. civilians in, release of. See under Geneva ambas-
sadorial talks
U.S. policy of nonrecognition, address and statements:
Dulles, 51, 220 ; Murphy, 491, 492
U.S. prisoners of war. See Prisoners of war
China, Republic of:
Communism, efforts to combat, 755, 757
Economic recovery, progress and problems, address
( Kali jar vi), 1059
Immunity question in National City Bank v. Republic of
China, 750
Mongolia, Outer, question of veto of admission to U.N.,
statement (Dulles), 1008
Quemoy and Matsu Islands, Communist buildup of air-
fields near, statement (Dulles), 1009
Soviet tanker Tuapse, jurisdiction over, 302
Taiwan, Communist threat of aggression, 693
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Air transport agreement (1946), agreement with U.S.
amending annex, 590
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55m,
210
Medical research, agreement with U.S. relating to
establishment of U.S. Navy unit in Taipei, 862
Naval craft, small, agreement with U.S. for loan of, 86
U.S. loan agreement, 307
U.N. representation, question of, 544
U.S. support of, address (Dulles), 526
Chou En-lai, 219, 220, 260, 261, 262
CIA. See Central Intelligence Agency
Cinematographic Art, International Exhibition of, U.S.
delegation, 367
Cisler, Walker L., 706
Citizenship, U.S., possible loss by "dual citizens," 658
Civil aviation. See Aviation
Civil Aviation Organization, International. See Interna-
tional Civil Aviation Organization
Civilians, protection in time of war. See Geneva conven-
tions
Claims :
Germany, Federal Republic of, agency established for
external restitution, 355
Japan, agreement with U.S. for payment of damages
caused by U.S. aircraft, 998
Japanese and German vested assets in U.S., return, 119,
971
Luxembourg, reciprocal war damage agreement with
U.S., 150
U.N. nationals, claims against —
Austria, for losses under state treaty, 970
Germany, for return of property subject to wartime
discriminatory treatment, 426
U.S. citizens and nationals, claims against —
Austria, understanding regarding protection and res-
toration of property, rights, and interests, 760, 967
(text), 1024
Claims — Continued
U.S. citizens and nationals, claims against — Continued
Cuba, payment of claims of U.S. companies, 27
Germany, U.S. proposed legislation for payment of
war claims against Germany, 119, 971
Japan, U.S. proposed legislation for payment of war
claims against Japan, 971
Mexico, final payment to U.S. under 1941 convention,
896
Clover seed, alsike, proclamation modifying import quota,
116
Coal and Steel Community, European :
Annual report, 1018
U.S. mission established, 643
Coexistence, definition, 975
Coffee trade with Latin America, addresses : Holland, 656,
962; Kalijarvi, 1062
Colclough, Vice Adm. Oswald S., 706
"Cold war," effect of Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting
on, statement (Dulles), 870
Collective security (see also Mutual defense, Mutual se-
curity and National defense) :
Associations for, statement (Dulles) at Geneva Foreign
Ministers Meeting, 728
Concept of, during past 60 years, address (Phleger), 647
Europe. See European security and North Atlantic
Treaty Organization
Near and Middle East. See under Near and Middle East
Philippines, address (Ferguson), 975
U.S. and free world policy of, addresses and statement :
Dulles, 6, 261, 262, 641, 1003 ; Murphy, 490, 491
Colombia :
Agricultural surpluses, agreement with U.S. for pur-
chase, 85, 86
Ambassador to U.S., credentials, 916
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 210
Health and sanitation, agreement with U.S., extending
1950 agreement, 406
Investment guaranties, agreement with U.S., 998
Medical education project, agreement with U.S., 770
Military assistance agreement with U.S., agreement
regarding duties of members of military missions,
678
Colombo Plan :
Atomic energy center for research and training, U.S.
proposal for, 749, 1010
Meeting (7th) of Consultative Committee:
Annual report, Department announcement and ex-
tract, 992, 995
Communique, 994
Ministerial meeting, statement (Hollister), 747
Objectives, 513
U.S. delegation, 514, 566, 567
Colonialism (see also Self-determination and Trust terri-
tories), Communist colonialism in South and South-
east Asia, 295
Columbia River power development, Canadian proposals
and U.S. position, statements by International Joint
Commission and U.S. chairman, 980
Commerce. See Trade
Commerce, Department of, pamphlet on establishing a
business in the Federal Republic of Germany, 886
1096
Department of State Bulletin
Commercial relations, U.S. and other countries. See Eco-
nomic policy and relations, U.S. ; Tariff policy, U.S. ;
Tariffs and trade, general agreement on; and Trade
Commercial samples and advertising material, interna-
tional convention to facilitate importation, 406, 549,
677, 769, 813, 861
Commercial treaties. See Trade : Treaties and Trade
agreements
Committee on Information from Non-Self-Governing Ter-
ritories :
Statement on report (Bell), 673
U.S. efforts for continuation, statement (Bell), 906,
907ra
Commodity Credit Corporation, disposal of agricultural
surpluses. See Agricultural surpluses
Communications (see also Telecommunication conven-
tion), facilities in vicinity of Stephenville, Newfound-
land, agreement with Canada amending 1952 agree-
ment, 86
Communications, freedom of, statement (Eisenhower) and
directive to Foreign Ministers, 175, 177
Communism (see also China, Communist, and Soviet
Union) :
Efforts of free world and captive peoples to overcome,
address (E. Dulles), 422
Europe, propaganda efforts in, 181, 184
Far East, aggression in, addresses and article: Lind-
beck, 751 ; Robertson, 295, 690
International communism, problem of, addresses :
Dulles, 9, 525, 1003 ; Ferguson, 975
"Peace" appeals, propaganda campaigns for, 79
Subversion, free world defense against, address (A.
Dulles), 600
Underdeveloped countries, propaganda efforts in, 345,
346
U.S. personnel security program, address (McLeod), 56S
Conant, James B. :
Addresses :
Germany, Federal Republic of, partnership with U.S.
in NATO, 12
Germany, reunification, 915
Goals of the University in the Free World, 837
Berlin, quadripartite status, U.S. position, text of note
and statement, 1013
Germany, anniversary of June 17 uprising in Soviet
Zone, statement, 15
U.S. Congressmen, detention in Soviet sector of Berlin,
U.S. protest, text of note and statement, 1013
Conferences and organizations, international (see also
subject), calendar of meetings, 35, 204, 403, 5S0, 763,
932
Confident of Our Future, address (Dulles), 639
Congress, U.S. :
Addresses by Prime Minister of Burma, 95
Foreign affairs and national defense, bipartisan discus-
sion of problems with President, 1049
Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting, meeting of Members
of Congress with Secretary Dulles, 686
Legislation :
Foreign policy, listed, 34, 152, 329, 357, 402, 434, 455,
495, 814
Foreign policy legislation, statement (Kalijarvi), S4S
Congress, U.S. — Continued
Legislation — Continued
Security legislation, Federal personnel, address
(McLeod), 56S
Legislation, proposed :
North Atlantic union, resolution proposing conven-
tion, letter (Dulles), 224
Organization for Trade Cooperation, U.S. member-
ship, postponement of hearings, 1SS
Sugar, statement of Department's views (Holland),
120
Tax treatment for business income earned abroad, 432
Vested assets, return to Germany and Japan, 119, 971
War claims of American nationals against Germany
and Japan, payment of, 119, 971
Presidential messages, reports, etc. See Eisenhower:
Messages, reports, and letters to Congress
U.N., support of, 483
U.N., 10th anniversary, resolution on renewed efforts
for peace, 3, 4
Consular districts, U.S., establishment in Austria, 442
Consular rights, amity, and economic relations, treaty
with Iran, 367, 369
Consular service, U.S. See Foreign Service
('(insulate, U.S., at Hanoi, Viet-Nam, closing, 10S6
Consultative Committee for Economic Development in
South and Southeast Asia. See Colombo Plan
Control posts (for military inspection). See Disarma-
ment
Cooper, Jere, 188
Copyright :
Inter-American convention on copyrights, 702
Universal copyright convention and related protocols,
163, 326, 327, 328, 441, 769
Costa Rica :
Inter-American Highway, Export-Import Bank credit
to finance, 898
Nicaraguan dispute, conciliation of, OAS Council reso-
lution and committee report, 546
Courts of foreign forces in U.S., proclamation discontinu-
ing, 361
Crime and Treatment of Offenders, U.N. Congress on
Prevention of:
Address (Rogers), 624
U.S. delegation, 243
Cronkhite, Bernice B., 575
Cuba:
Claims of U.S. companies, payment of, 27
Sugar legislation, U.S., effects of proposed revision of
Sugar Act on Cuban economy, 122
Tariff concessions, preferential, termination by U.S.,
226, 228, 230
Tariff negotiations, possible adjustment in preferential
rates, 509, 510
Tariff quota on rice, GATT, agreement with U.S., 27
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Air Force mission, agreement with U.S. extending
1950 agreement, 38
Army mission agreement with U.S., extension, 38
Copyrights, inter-American convention on, 702
GATT, declaration on continued application of sched-
ules, 164
Index, July to December 1955
1097
Cuba— Continued
Treaties, agreements, etc. — Continued
Military assistance agreement with U.S., performance
of duties by Armed Forces missions, 516, 590
Cultural property :
Convention for protection of cultural property in event
of armed conflict, S61
Restitution of, agency established in West Germany, 355
Cultural relations :
Cultural centers overseas, U.S. assistance to, article
(E. R. Murphy), 35S
Inter-American convention for promotion of cultural re-
lations, 441
Swedish contributions to American culture, address
(Warren), 222
Cumish, Wilfred C, 354
Cunha, Paulo, 653, 966
Currency, guaranties against risks respecting inconverti-
bility and expropriation of, agreement with Ireland,
770
Cusack, Elizabeth B., 316
Customs :
Customs tariffs, creation of international union for pub-
lication of, protocol modifying 1890 convention, 769
Road vehicles, convention on temporary importation of,
289, 931
Touring, convention concerning facilities for, 289, 516,
931
U.S. consular certification of invoices, 399, 698
Cyprus question :
Address (Allen), 684
Letter of President Eisenhower to King Paul, 560
Messages to Prime Ministers of Greece and Turkey
(Dulles), 496
Proposed inscription on General Assembly agenda :
U.S. position, statement (Lodge), 545
Decision to omit from agenda, 546re
Czechoslovakia :
Arms shipments to Egypt, 604, 684, 689
Propaganda "peace" appeals, 81
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Austrian state treaty, 702
GATT, declaration on continued application of sched-
ules, 164
Load line convention, international, 442
Darden, Colgate Whitehead, Jr., 858
Dasher, Maj. Gen. Charles L., 1012
Debts, German external, agreement on, 164
Defense commissions, Joint Brazil-U.S. Military and De-
fense Commissions, continuation agreement, 769
Defense Department, foreign-aid functions, Executive
order regarding allocation of funds, 273
DeLany, Vice Adm. Walter S., 918
Denmark :
Import restrictions on U.S. goods, relaxation, 762
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 249
Atomic information, agreement between parties to
NAT for cooperation, 1086
Commercial samples and advertising material, inter-
national convention to facilitate importation, 769
Denmark — Continued
Treaties, agreements, etc.— Continued
Customs convention on temporary importation of pri-
vate road vehicles, 931
Customs facilities for touring, convention on, 931
Employment at sea, minimum age, convention on, 589
GATT, rectifications and modifications to annexes
and text of schedules, 4th protocol, 702
Visual and auditory materials, agreement for inter-
national circulation, 406
DEW. See Distant early warning system
Dharmawara, Chief Venerable Vira, 896
Diem, Ngo Dinh, 760
Dietrich, Sepp, 887
Dillon, Douglas, 976, 1014
Dion, Father Louis, 103, 784
Diplomacy, U.S. (see also Foreign Service), address
(Beaulac), 335
Diplomatic immunity, statement (Murphy), 183
Diplomatic representatives, U.S., abroad. See under
Foreign Service
Diplomatic representatives in the U.S., presentation of
credentials : Colombia, Iceland, Laos, Lebanon, Lux-
embourg, Pakistan, Philippines, 916; Saudi Arabia,
361 ; Turkey, 20
Disarmament (see also Armaments) :
Aerial inspection and exchange of military blueprints
(see also under Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting
and Geneva Heads of Government Conference) :
Addresses and statements : Dulles, 339, 528, 829, 830 ;
Lodge, 438, 528, 738, 1032; Murphy, 493; Phillips,
258; Stassen, 703; Wadsworth, 530
Control posts and inspection, Soviet proposals :
Letter (Bulganin) and reply (Eisenhower), 643
Statement (Stassen), 705
Stalemate in U.N. Disarmament Subcommittee, ad-
dress (Wilcox), 742
U.N. committee action on, 1049n.
U.S. memorandum, 708
Armed forces, proposed reduction of, letter (Bulganin),
646
Atomic weapons, prohibition of:
Soviet proposals, letter (Bulganin), 644
Statements on Soviet proposals at Geneva (Dulles),
874, 875
Basic principles, address (Stassen), 41S
Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting, discussions and pro-
posals concerning. See Geneva Foreign Ministers
Meeting
Geneva Heads of Government Conference, discussions
and proposals concerning. See Geneva Heads of
Government Conference
Soviet draft declaration on, 882
Task forces for study of, 706
Tripartite (U.S., U.K., French) draft statement on, 882
U.N. action, 1954, report to Congress (Eisenhower), 386,
388
U.N. progress, addresses : Lodge, 73S ; Wilcox, 742, 904
U.S. position, address and statement : Lodge, 765 ; Wads-
worth, 530
Disarmament Commission, U.N., U.S. Deputy Represent-
ative, confirmation, 264
1098
Department of State Bulletin
Displaced persons. See Refugees and displaced persons
Disputes, pacific settlement of :
"Renunciation of force" principle, U.S. policy, addresses
and statements : Dulles, 221, 260, 261, 641, 690 ; Rob-
ertson, 693
Role of United Nations, address (Phillips), 258
Distant early warning system (DEW) :
Agreement with Canada, 22
U.S.-Canadian inspection of installations, 495
Dominican Republic :
Agriculture, agreement with U.S. for cooperative pro-
gram, 909
Education program agreement with U.S., extension, 38
GATT, protocol on terms of accession of Japan, 702
Military assistance agreement, disposition of U.S. equip-
ment, agreement with U.S., 406
Tariff concessions to U.S., GATT, request for renegotia-
tion, 274
Doolittle, James H., 706
Double taxation, conventions for avoidance of, with —
Italy :
Estates and inheritances, 290, 442
Income, 290, 442
Netherlands, income, protocol and agreement supple-
menting and extending 194S convention to Antilles,
37, 38, 290, 442, 907, 909
Drugs, narcotic (see also Drugs, potent) :
Opium, protocol regulating production, trade, and use of
(1953), 86, 289, 442
Protocol amending certain international agreements by
transferring certain duties and functions from
League of Nations to U.N. and WHO, 623
Protocol bringing under international control drugs out-
side scope of 1931 convention, as amended by 1946
protocol, 623
Drugs, potent {see also Drugs, narcotic), protocol for
termination of agreements for unification of
formulas, 623
Dried figs, imports of, 462
"Dual citizens," possible loss of U.S. citizenship, 658
Dulles, Allen W., 600
Dulles, Eleanor, 422
Dulles, John Foster :
Addresses, statements, etc. :
Algerian question in General Assembly, 605
Arab-Israeli dispute, 421, 1009, 1010
Argentine-U.S. relations, 605
Atomic energy, peaceful uses, 527
Austrian state treaty, 524
Berlin, Soviet obligation to West regarding access to,
1010
Bipartisan unity in foreign policy, 965
Burmese Prime Minister, visit to U.S., 50
China, Communist:
Buildup of airfields in Taiwan area, 1009
Nonrecognition, 220
United Nations, question of representation, 1011
U.S. fliers, release of, 262
Collective security, 53, 261, 262, 524, 525, 641, 1003
Communism, international, 525, 1003
Disarmament, 339, 528, 640, 642
Dulles, John Foster — Continued
Addresses, statements, etc. — Continued
Disputes, forceful settlement of, U.S. opposition, 221,
260
East-West tension, Soviet disinterest in relaxation of,
Economic productivity, U.S., 640
Eden, Prime Minister, visit to U.S., 1009
European unity, 964, 1005
French-Tunisian conventions, 301
Geneva ambassadorial talks with Communist China,
220, 260, 341, 527, 606, 689, 690, 1008
Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting. See Geneva
Foreign Ministers Meeting
Geneva Heads of Government Conference. See
Geneva Heads of Government Conference
German inland waterways control, British concession
to East Germany, 1011
German reunification, 51, 54, 524, 525, 606, 964, 965,
1005
Goa, dispute between India and Portugal, 263, 1007,
1008
Japan, economic and defense problems, joint state-
ment with Foreign Minister, 419
Korea, unification, proposed conference, 341
Korean-Japanese tension over so-called Rhee line,
1009
Korean Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission, 298,
340
Luce, Mrs. Clare Boothe, reported tapping of tele-
phone of, 1010
Mutual security and assistance programs, U.S., 641
National defense, 640
Near and Middle East :
Arms supply policy in, 560, 604, 689
Johnson mission, 340
Policy statement, 378
Problems in, 525
U.S. economic programs, 965
North Atlantic Council, ministerial meeting (Dec.
1955), 1048
Nuclear bomb tests, Soviet proposed suspension, 964
Nuclear training center in Asia, location, 1010
Organization of American States, 525
Patriotism, 639
Peace, 642
President Eisenhower's illness, conduct of foreign
policy during, 566, 607
Renunciation of force, 221, 260, 261, 641, 690
Rumania, Soviet troops in, 339
Satellite question, 525
Seal of the United States, opening of exhibit, 94
SEATO, 526
Southeast Asia, U.S. economic programs, 965
Soviet armed forces, proposed reduction of, 338
Soviet attack on U.S. plane, 50, 52
Soviet "new look" policy, 639
Soviet-U.S. exchange of persons, 689
"Spirit of Geneva," 418, 524, 525, 529, 1007
Taiwan, defense of, 526
Underdeveloped countries, U.S. policy, 1005
^
Index, July to December 7955
1099
Dulles, John Foster — Continued
Addresses, statements, etc. — Continued
United Nations :
Entering the Second Decade, 523
Membership question, 607, 100S, 1001
Moral Foundation of, 10
Tenth anniversary, 6, 50
Uniting for peace resolution, 649
U.S. fliers, release by Communist China, 262
Viet-Nam, elections, 50
Administrative actions :
Immigration and nationality laws, change in delega-
tion of authority, 478
International Cooperation Administration, establish-
ment and functions, 124, 767
Correspondence, messages, etc. :
Cyprus question, concern over Greek-Turkish differ-
ences, 496
Geneva conventions for protection of war victims, 71
German vested assets in U.S., return of, 973»
Inter-American Commission of Women, 586
Japanese cotton textiles, question of import restric-
tions, 1064
North Atlantic union, 224
St. Croix River Basin, investigation of water re-
sources, 21
United Nations, review of 9th year, letter to President
transmitting report, 388
War claims by American nationals and return of
vested assets to Germany and Japan, 119
Discussions and meetings (see also subject) :
Germany, Minister of Foreign Affairs, 560
Portugal, Minister of Foreign Affairs, joint commu-
nique, 966
Visit to Austria, 733, 789
Visit to Yugoslavia, 733, 833
Earthquake, Greece, U.S. aid, 100
East-West contacts (see also under Geneva Foreign Min-
isters Meeting and Geneva Heads of Government Con-
ference) :
East- West trade. See under Trade
Soviet disinterest in relaxation of tensions, 1010
Economic activities of Soviet-bloc countries in free world,
Battle Act report, 342
Economic Aid, Joint Council for, agreement with Haiti
establishing, 1086
Economic and Social Council, Inter-American, U.S. repre-
sentative, 166
Economic and Social Council, U.N. :
Documents, lists of, 209, 248, 366, 515, 583, 714
Self-determination, resolution to establish commission
to study, 80S»
Trade, international, efforts to curb restrictive practices,
541, 542
U.S. delegation to 20th session, 109
U.S. representative, confirmation, 109
Yearbook on Human Rights, 2S0
Economic and technical aid to foreign countries {see also
Agricultural surpluses, Colombo Plan, Export-Import
Bank, International Bank, International Cooperation
Administration, Mutual security and other assistance
programs ; Underdeveloped countries and United
Nations: Technical assistance program) :
Address (Dulles), 641
Aid to : Africa, 32 ; Asia, 31 ; Bolivia, 442 ; Brazil, 368 ;
Chile, 164, 1086 ; China, Republic of, 307 ; El Salva-
dor, 406 ; Europe, 31, 835 ; Guatemala, 790 ; Haiti,
369, 909; India, 31; Korea, 190; Laos, 536; Latin
America, 33, 598 ; Liberia, 770 ; Libya, 210, 328, 427 ;
Near East, 32 ; Paraguay, 177 ; Yugoslavia, 124
Education, cooperative program agreements. See under
Education
Health and sanitation, cooperative program agreements.
See Health and sanitation
International Development Advisory Board, members,
493
Economic Commission for Europe, U.N. :
Electric Power, Committee on, U.S. delegate to 13th
session, 907,
Timber Committee, U.S. delegate to 13th session, 440
Economic Commission for Latin America, U.N., U.S. dele-
gation to 6th session, 405
Economic Defense Advisory Committee, structure, 919, 920
Economic Development, Inter-American Bank for, U.S.
position on establishment, 140
Economic development in South and Southeast Asia, Con-
sultative Committee. See Colombo Plan
Economic development of Latin America, U.S. contribu-
tions to, address (Holland), 595
Economic missions, exchange of between Soviet Union
and free-world countries, 347
Economic policy and relations, U.S. (see also individual
countries) :
Aid to foreign countries. See Agricultural surpluses,
Economic and technical aid, Export-Import Bank,
and Mutual security and other assistance programs
Domestic economy :
Address and statement : Baker, 314 ; Kalijarvi, 1062,
1064
FOA report, excerpts, 270, 271
East-West trade. See under Trade
Far East, U.S. economic policy, importance in com-
batting communism, 758
Foreign economic policy :
Antitrust policies, relation to foreign trade and in-
vestment, address (Kalijarvi), 538
U.S. objectives, statement (Kalijarvi), S46
International Development Advisory Board, members,
493
Organization for Trade Cooperation. See Organization
for Trade Cooperation
Tariff policy. See Tariff policy, U.S.
Economic relations, amity, and consular rights, treaty
with Iran, 367, 369
Economic situation, world, address and statement : Baker,
312, Kalijarvi, 1057
ECOSOC. See Economic and Social Council, U.N.
Ecuador :
Fishery resources of southeastern Pacific, conservation,
meeting with U.S., Chile, and Peru, 3S4, 513, 1025
1100
Department of Si'ofe Bulletin
Ecuador — Continued
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Agricultural commodities, agreement with U.S., 676,
678
Cultural relations, inter-American convention for pro-
motion of, 441
Duty-free entry and defrayment of inland transporta-
tion charges on relief supplies, agreement with U.S.,
516
Health and sanitation, agreement with U.S., 38
Military missions, agreement for performance of
duties specified in mutual defense assistance agree-
ment with U.S., 998
Opium, protocol regulating production, trade, and
use of, 442
Reciprocal trade agreement with U.S., termination, 86,
140, 511, 516
Slavery convention (1926), protocol amending, 442
Vessels, naval, agreement with U.S. for furnishing
supplies and services to, 249
Eden Plan for German reunification, references to, 729,
730, 781, 784, 819, 822
Eden, Sir Anthony, 705, 1009
Edinburgh Film Festival, 9th International, U.S. delega-
tion, 367
Education (see also Educational exchange program) :
Books, U.S., need for increased distribution abroad, 616
Change and improvement necessitated by world con-
ditions, address (Murphy), 1055
Cooperative program agreements, with —
Brazil, industrial education, extending 1950 agree-
ment, 249
Colombia, medical education, 770
Dominican Republic, extending 1951 agreement, 38
Libya, 1086
Panama, extending 1950 agreement, 932
Peru, extending 1950 agreement, 38
NATO fellowship and scholarship program, 735
Public school administration by Philippine Department
of Education within U.S. Naval Reservation at
Subic Bay, agreement with Philippines, S62
Universities in the free and unfree world, comparison
of goals, address (Conant), 837
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, U.N. :
Constitution, 368
U.S. National Commission, 5th conference, 134
Educational Commission, U.S., operational agreement with
U.K., 38
Educational exchange program, international (see also
Education) :
Address (Simmons), 92
Agreements, with —
Austria, amending 1950 agreement, 249
France, financing agreement amending 1948 agree-
ment, 141, 210
Greece, amending 194S agreement, 86
Italy, financing agreement amending 194S agreement,
210
Norway, renewing and amending 1949 agreement, 37,
S6
Thailand, financing agreement amending 1950 agree-
ment, 164
Educational exchange program, international — Continued
Atomic medical facilities in U.S., tour by foreign doc-
tors, 264
Cambodian religious leader, visit to U.S., 896
Report on activities under Fulbright Act (Jan. 1-Dec.
31, 1954), 232
Study of relationship between State Department and
ICA programs, 966
Egypt:
Arms shipments from Czechoslovakia, 604, 684, 6S9
Aswan Dam, U.S., U.K., and World Bank financial sup-
port, discussions on, 1050
Dispute with Israel. See under Arab-Israeli dispute
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Agricultural surpluses, agreement with U.S., 10S6
Civil aviation convention, international, protocols re-
lating to permanent seat and sessions of ICAO, 123
Commercial samples and advertising material, inter-
national convention to facilitate importation of, 677
Cultural property, convention for protection of in
event of armed conflict, 861
Eisenhower, Dwight D. :
Addresses, statements, etc. :
Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act
of 1954, title I, amendment, 362
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreements with Belgium,
Canada, and the U.K., 58
Atomic energy, hope for second conference on peace-
ful uses, 381
Atoms-for-peace postage stamp, U.S., on occasion of
issuance, 217
Atoms-for-peace proposal, 172
Burma, joint statement with Prime Minister, 96
Disarmament, proposals for inspection system (see
also under Disarmament), 172, 173, 216, 439
East-West contacts, 174, 217
European security, 216
Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting, 217, 728, 871
Geneva Heads of Government Conference. See
Geneva Heads of Government Conference
German reunification, 216
Inter-American Commission of Women, 586
Mutual Security Appropriation Act, 1956, approval,
362
Near East, reaffirmation of U.S. policy in, 845
Peace, 131, 215, 375
Refugee Relief Act, recommended amendments to, 564
"Spirit of Geneva," 376, 377
Trade Agreements Extension Act, 25
United Nations, 10th anniversary, 3
U.S. fliers, release by Communist China, 262
Congressional leaders, meeting with, discussions on
foreign affairs and national defense, 1049
Correspondence and messages :
Arab-Israeli dispute, need for peaceful settlement, let-
ter to Rabbi Silver, 894
Atomic energy, peaceful uses, progress and future,
787
Atomic Energy, U.N. Conference on Peaceful Uses, 300
Berlin, on 5th anniversary of installation of Freedom
Bell, 734, 916
Index, July to December 1955
1101
Eisenhower, Dvvight D. — Continued
Correspondence and messages — Continued
Bicycles, imported, increased duties on, 401
Greece, Cyprus question, letter to King Paul, 560
Disarmament, 643
Edible tree nuts, letter to Tariff Commission cancel-
ing hearing, 276
Geneva conventions for protection of war victims,
ratification, 454
Geneva Heads of Government Conference, exchange of
letters with Konrad Adenauer on results and future
hopes, 259
Guatemalan President, welcome on arrival in U.S., 790
Mexico, disaster in Tampico, U.S. aid, 791
Philippine-American Day, 975
Rye imports, request for investigation of effects on
domestic price-support program, 28
Tariff concessions, GATT, withheld by U.S., 397
Tariff concessions to Canada and Benelux countries,
231
Tariff concessions to Italy, effective date for, 617
Executive orders. See Executive orders
Illness, conduct of foreign policy during, statements
(Dulles), 566, 607
Messages, reports, and letters to Congress :
Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act,
report (Jan.-June 1955), 197
Atomic information, exchange of for mutual defense,
agreements with Canada and U.K., 59, 62
Glaser, Kurt, denial of permanent residence status in
U.S., 83
Lend-lease operations, transmittal of report to Con-
gress, 760
Mutual security program, report (Jan. 1-June 30,
1955), excerpt, 428
Organization for Trade Cooperation, U.S. member-
ship, 113, 188
United Nations, annual report (1954), 385
Proclamations. See Proclamations by the President
Elbrick, C. Burke, 788
Electric Power, Committee on, U.S. delegate to 13th ses-
sion, 907
El Salvador:
Fisheries agreements, extending 1951 agreement with
U.S., 770
Health and sanitation program, agreement with U.S.
extending 1950 agreement, 327
Technical labor services, agreement with U.S. for co-
operative program, 406
U.S. Ambassador, appointment, 678
Employment at sea, convention fixing minimum age for
children, 1024
Enemy assets in U.S., disposition, 971
Enemy property in U.S., disposition of, designation of
attorney general as administrator, 845
"Escape clause" provisions in U.S. tariff laws, 930
Estate tax convention between U.S. and Italy for the
avoidance of double taxation, 290, 442
Ethiopia :
Aviation facilities, U.S. loan for expansion, 617
UNESCO constitution, 368
Europe (see also individual countries) :
Collective security. See European security and North
Atlantic Treaty Organization
Eastern and Central Europe, captive peoples, question
of restoration of sovereignty, 172, 219, 561, 562, 833»
Eastern Europe, Soviet investment policies, 344
Refugees. See Intergovernmental Committee for Euro-
pean Migration and Refugees and displaced persons
U.S. economic aid, 835
U.S. mutual security program :
Report (Jan. 1953-June 1955), 267, 269, 272
Report (Jan. 1-June 30, 1955), 428
Unity, addresses and statement : Dulles, 964. 1005 : Mur-
phy, 46
Western Europe, progress in economic recovery, address
(Kalijarvi), 1057, 1063
European Coal and Steel Community :
Annual report, 1018
U.S. mission established, 643
European Migration, Intergovernmental Committee for.
See Intergovernmental Committee for European Mi-
gration
European security (see also North Atlantic Treaty Or-
ganization) :
Address and statement (Dulles), 53, 524, 525
Defense of Europe, address (Gruenther), 609
Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting, discussions and pro-
posals. See under Geneva Foreign Ministers Meet-
ing
Geneva Heads of Government Conference, discussions
and proposals. See under Geneva Heads of Govern-
ment Conference
Progress toward, address (Murphy), 834
Western European Union :
Armaments control system, 417
German membership, 44
Examinations, Foreign Service, announced, 575
Exchange of persons :
Educational exchange program, international. See Edu-
cational exchange program
German University Exchange Service, 837
Study of relationship between State Department and
ICA programs, 966
Visitors to U.S., question of permanent residence, mes-
sage to Senate (Eisenhower), 83
With France, address (Dillon), 1014
With Soviet Union (see also Geneva Foreign Ministers
Meeting and Geneva Heads of Government Con-
ference: East-West contacts), 151, 689
Executive orders :
Agriculture Department personnel abroad, regulations
affecting, 306
Bulgarian, Hungarian, and Rumanian property, dispo-
sition of, designation of attorney general as admin-
istrator, 845
Federal employees serving abroad, post differentials and
cost-of-living allowances, 549
Mutual Security Acts (1955, 1956), implementation of,
273
Personnel security program, address (McLeod), 569
Strategic materials, release of stockpile in event of en-
emy attack, 701
1102
Department of State Bulletin
Executive orders — Continued
Tariff of Foreign Service fees, amendment, 699
Export-Import Bank :
Lending activities, report (Jan. 1-June 30, 1955), 619
Loans to: Costa Rica, 898; Ethiopia, 617; Japan, 263;
Latin America, 597, 960, 961, 963
Exports, U.S. (see also Trade), to Soviet bloc, U.S. con-
trols on peaceful goods relaxed, 784
Expropriation and currency inconvertibility, guaranties
against risks respecting, agreement with Ireland, 770
External debts, German, agreement on, 164, 1024
Facilities assistance programs, agreements with —
Netherlands, 210
Spain, extending, 210
Turkey, 290
United Kingdom, extending, 210
Fairless, Benjamin, 706
FAO. See Food and Agriculture Organization
Far East (see also individual countries) :
Communist intentions in, address (Robertson), 690
Economic recovery, progress in, address (Kalijarvi),
105S
Foreign Relations, volumes on, published, 165, 517
Heads of Government Conference and future confer-
ences, possible discussions at, statement (Dulles),
50
State Department officials, visit, 566
U.S. policy and Communist China, article (Lindbeck),
751
Ferguson, Homer, 974
Fields, Murray, 354
Filberts, shelled, proclamation on modification of restric-
tions on imports, 275
Film Festival, Edinburgh, 9th International, U.S. delega-
tion, 367
Finance Corporation, International, 598, 627, 858
Fingerprinting provision for nonofficial visitors to U.S.,
104
Finland :
GATT, protocol of rectifications to French text, 932
German external debts, agreement on, 164
■Tariff concessions to U.S., GATT, request for renegotia-
tion, 115
United Nations, admission to, 1067, 1068, 1070, 1071»
U.S. Ambassador, appointment, 678
Fisheries :
Agreements extending 1951 agreement with El Salvador,
770
Fishery resources of southeastern Pacific, meeting on
conservation (U.S., Chile, Ecuador, Peru), 384, 513,
1025
Great Lakes fisheries convention with Canada, 678, 770
Tuna industry, domestic, study of, 119
Fisheries Commission, International North Pacific, meet-
ing, 357
Fisheries Commission, International Pacific Salmon, re-
port on destructive effect of power projects on Fraser
River salmon, 984, 9S5
Fisk, James B., 706
FOA. See Foreign Operations Administration
Folsom, Robert S., 369, 5S9
Food and Agriculture Organization, U.N. :
Role in solving world agricultural problems, statement
(Benson), 934
Technical aid to underdeveloped countries, 712, 713
U.S. delegation to 8th session of conference of, 812
Force, renunciation of. See "Renunciation of force"
Forced labor in Communist countries, report to Congress
(Eisenhower) on U.N. action (1954), 387, 392
Foreign aid. See Agricultural surpluses; Economic and
technical aid; Economic policy and relations, U.S.;
Mutual security and assistance programs ; Refugees
and displaced persons ; Underdeveloped countries ;
United Nations : Technical assistance program ; and
individual countries
Foreign economic policy, U.S. See Economic policy and
relations, U.S.
Foreign Language Institute, Korea, 506
Foreign Ministers, U.S., U.K., France, consultations in
New York :
Geneva meeting, arrangements for, 415, 559, 606
Germany, statement of views on Soviet obligations in,
559
Foreign Ministers Meeting, Geneva. See Geneva Foreign
Ministers Meeting
Foreign Operations Administration (see also Interna-
tional Cooperation Administration) :
Final report to President (Jan. 1953-June 1955), 265
Functions transferred to ICA, 124
Foreign policy, U.S. :
Bipartisanship, statement (Dulles), 965
Conduct of foreign policy during President Eisenhower's
illness, statements (Dulles), 566, 607
Discussion on, by President and congressional leaders,
statement (Hagerty), 1049
How We Work With Other Nations, address (Simmons),
91
Legislation. See under Congress
Review of, address (Murphy), 490
Foreign Relations of the United States, 1939, Vol. IV, pub-
lished, 165
Foreign Relations of the United States, 1940, Vol. IV, The
Far East, published, 517
Foreign Scholarships, Board of, appointments, 575
Foreign Service (see also State Department) :
Agriculture Department personnel abroad, Executive
order concerning, 306
Allowances for cost-of-living and post differentials, regu-
lations, 549
Ambassadors and minister, appointments and confirma-
tions, 249, 369, 516, 678, 722, 998
Consular districts in Austria, establishment, 442
Consular service, history and reorganization, article
(Marx), 447
Consulate at Hanoi, Viet-Nam, closing, 1086
Designation of U.S. representative on Inter-American
Economic and Social Council, 166
Development, address (Heath), 1051
Diplomatic immunity, statement (Murphy), 183
Economic officers, meeting, 454
Examinations announced, 575
Functions, addresses on : Beaulac, 335 ; Simmons, 92
Index, July to December 7955
1103
Foreign Service — Continued
Functions and authorities of State Department officers
concerning Foreign Service, public notice, 909
Immigration and nationality laws, change in delegation
of authority, 478
Legation in Hungary, surveillance of staff members,
U.S. protest, 462
Legations raised to embassy status : Laos, 299 ; Luxem-
bourg, 478
Selection Boards, meeting and membership, 125
Women in the Foreign Service, address (Heath), 1051
Wriston Committee program, report on progress of in-
tegration and recruitment, 1053
Foreign trade. See Trade
Formosa Straits, situation in, 492
France :
Berlin, quadripartite status, position, 1013n, 1014
Disarmament, tripartite (with U.S. and U.K.) draft
statement on, 882
Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting. See Geneva For-
eign Ministers Meeting
Geneva Heads of Government Conference. See Geneva
Heads of Government Conference
Import taxes, discussions at 10th session of GATT, 1018
Morocco, French, gee Morocco, French
Quadripartite talks with U.S., U.K., and Yugoslavia,
joint communique, 49
Soviet obligations in Germany, U.S., U.K., and French
joint statement and note to Moscow following
Soviet-East German agreements of Sept. 20, 559, 616
Tariff concessions to U.S., GATT, request for renegotia-
tion, 114
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Atomic information, agreement between parties to
NAT for cooperation, 931
Austrian state treaty, 209
Copyright convention, universal, 769
Educational exchange programs, financing, agree-
ment with U. S. amending 1948 agreement, 141, 210
Equipment under mutual defense assistance program,
disposition, 998
GATT, declaration on continued application of sched-
ules, 164
Merchant ship masters and officers, minimum profes-
sional capacity requirements, 589
Safety of life at sea convention, extension to posses-
sions, 249
Seafarers, medical examination of, 5S9
Seamen, able, certification of, 5S9
Seamen, holidays with pay, 589
Seamen, minimum age for employment at sea, 589
Seamen, shipowners' liability for, 589
Surplus agricultural commodities, agreement with
U.S., 406, 99S
U.S. armed forces, members dying in France, agree-
ment with U.S. regarding burial, 210
Tunisia, cooperation with, statement (Dulles), 301
U.S. NATO military forces, relations with local com-
munities, address (Dillon), 1014
Four Power conference. See Geneva Heads of Govern-
ment Conference
Fraser River salmon fisheries, destructive effect of power
projects on, report of International Pacific Salmon
Fisheries Commission, 984, 985
Free world, combined strength, chart, 33
Free World Defense Against Communist Subversion, ad-
dress (A. Dulles), 600
Freedom, Responsibility, and Law, address (Lodge), 696
Freedom Bell, 5th anniversary of installation, message
(Eisenhower), 734
Friendship, commerce, and navigation, treaty with Ger-
many, 249
Fulbright Act (see also Educational exchange program),
report to Congress on activities during 1954, 232
Fur seals, North Pacific, conference for conservation of,
437, 952
Gallman, Waldemar, 895, 926
GATT. See Tariffs and trade, general agreement on
Gaza border incidents. See Arab-Israeli dispute
General agreement on tariffs and trade (GATT). See
Tariffs and trade, general agreement on
General Assembly, U.N. (see also United Nations) :
Algerian question. See Algerian question
Atomic Energy Agency, International. See Atomic
Energy Agency, International
Chinese representation in U.N., postponement of con-
sideration at 10th session, 544
Cyprus question. See Cyprus question
Documents, lists of, 20S, 441, 515, 583, 676, 714
Korea, Republic of, and North Korea, question of par-
ticipation in Committee I discussions, 1074
Non-Self -Governing Territories, Committee on Informa-
tion from :
Statement on report (Bell), 673
U.S. efforts for continuation, statement (Bell), 906,
907»
Resolutions :
Administrative Tribunal, review by International
Court of Justice of judgments, text, 946
Admission of new members, text, 1069
Atomic energy, peaceful uses, 1030
Atomic energy, 2d international conference on peace-
ful uses, draft, 665, SOI
Atomic Energy Agency, International, draft, 801
Atomic radiation, effects of, 1031
Charter review conference, text, 949
Human rights, advisory services in the field of, text,
1039
ICAO, West German admission to membership, 811,
811«.
Korean question, 1081, 1085 (text)
Moroccan question, decision to postpone considera-
tion of, text, 1041
Non-Self-Governing Territories, Committee on Infor-
mation from, continuation, 907n
Refugee relief program, 633 (text), 634«, 762, 811,
812m
Technical assistance program, U.N., text, SOS
Self-determination, U.S. proposals for study of, address
(Murphy), 891, 893
Tenth session :
Addresses : Dulles, 523 ; Wilcox, 483
no4
Department of State Bulletin
General Assembly, U.N. — Continued
Tenth session — Continued
Agenda, provisional, 363, 365, 384, 437, 583
U.S. delegation, 221, 366, 488
Geneva ambassadorial talks, U.S.-Coninimiist Cbina :
Announcement of resumption of talks and statement
(Dulles), 219, 220
Cease-fire in Formosa area, statements (Dulles), 220,
260, 261
Civilians, U.S. and Chinese, negotiations for release :
Addresses and statements : Dulles, 220, 260, 527 ; John-
son, 456; Murphy, 492; Robertson, 692
Agreed announcement on release :
Text, 456
Implementation, progress of, 489
U.S. compliance and Communist violation, 1049
U.S. citizens imprisoned in Communist China, list,
457
Progress of negotiations, statements (Dulles), 260, 341,
606, 689, 1008, 1008w
Renunciation of force, statements concerning (Dulles).
221, 260, 261, 690
Geneva conventions on treatment of prisoners of war,
wounded and sick, and civilians (1949) :
Current actions, 123, 289, 516
Status of and reservations to, 72
U.S. ratification, letters and statements regarding (Dul-
les, Eisenhower, Murphy), 69, 454
Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting (Oct. 27-Nov. 16, 1955) :
Addresses and statements : Dulles, preconference state-
ments, 606, 687, 688; Dulles, departure statement,
686; Dulles, conference statements, 727, 72S, 775,
780, 781, 819, 823, 825, 828, 872, 875, 876, 880, 8S1,
883 ; Dulles, report to Nation, 867 ; Eisenhower, 21 7,
728 : Molotov, 784 ; Murphy, 834, 1055
Atomic energy, peaceful uses, Soviet proposals, 779
Aviation, Western proposals for reciprocal civil aviation
rights with Soviet Union, statements (Dulles), 776,
878
Collective defense organizations, statement (Dulles),
728
Consultations regarding preparations :
Meeting between Secretary Dulles and congressional
leaders, 686
New York consultations :
Announcement, 415
Communique, 559
Statement (Dulles), 606
Date and place, 177, 301
Directive to Foreign Ministers by Geneva Heads of
Government Conference, 176
Disarmament and mutual inspection proposals :
Addresses and statements : Dulles, 727, S28, 869, 872,
884; Murphy, 1056
Directive to Foreign Ministers by Geneva Heads of
Government Conference, 176
Soviet draft declaration, 882
Soviet proposal, 832 (text) ; statements (Dulles), 874,
875
Tripartite (U.S., U.K., French) proposal, text, 831
Tripartite (U.S., U.K., French) statement, 882
Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting — Continued
Documents published, 916
East-West contacts :
Address and statements: Dulles, 727, 775, 869, 876,
880, 881, 885 ; Murphy, 834, 1056
Directive to Foreign Ministers by Geneva Heads of
Government Conference, 177
Soviet draft statement, 881
Soviet proposal, text, 779
Tripartite (U.S., U.K., French) proposal, 778
Tripartite (U.S., U.K., French) statement, 925
European security :
Address and statements: Dulles, 780, 781, 819, 823,
825, 868, 883 ; Molotov, 784 ; Murphy, 1056
Directive to Foreign Ministers by Geneva Heads of
Government Conference, 176
Soviet draft treaty, text, 7S3
Soviet proposals, 732 (text), 823, 828 (text) ; state-
ment (Dulles), 825
Tripartite (U.S., U.K., French) declaration, text, 886
Tripartite (U.S., U.K., French) proposal (treaty of
assurance), text, 729
Final communique, text, 886
German reunification :
Address and statements: Dulles, 606, 688, 727, 729,
775, 781, 819, 823, 825, 868, 883 ; Eisenhower, 728 ;
Murphy, 1056
Directive to Foreign Ministers by Geneva Heads of
Government Conference, 176
Soviet proposal, 819, 820, 827 (text)
Tripartite (U.S., U.K., French) declaration, text, 886
Tripartite (U.S., U.K., French) proposals:
Free elections, text, 828
Statements (Dulles), 820, 823
Treaty of assurance, text, 729
Middle East problems, question of discussion of, 688
Results, statements (Dulles), 867, 883
"Spirit of Geneva" (see also "Spirit of Geneva"), effect
of meeting on, statements (Dulles), S67, 868, 870
U.S. delegation, 687
Geneva Heads of Government Conference (July 18-23,
1955) :
Addresses and statements: Dulles, 9, 50, 132, 218, 339,
524, 525 ; Eisenhower, 4, 131, 171, 215, 376, 377 ;
Murphy, 48, 49 ; Robertson, 691
Agenda, possible items, 50
Agreement by Soviets on time and place of meeting, 20
Consultations regarding preparations :
Paris meeting, statement (Dulles), 132
San Francisco meeting, 50
Directive to Foreign Ministers, 176
Disarmament and mutual inspection proposals :
Address and statements : Dulles, 218 ; Eisenhower, 172,
173, 216
Directive to Foreign Ministers, 176
Documents published, 339, 686
East- West contacts :
Address and statement (Eisenhower), 174, 217
Directive to Foreign Ministers, 177
Index, July to December 1955
392566—56 3
no5
Geneva Heads of Government Conference — Continued
European security :
Address and statement : Dulles, 218 ; Eisenhower, 216
Directive to Foreign Ministers, 176
German reunification :
Address and statements: Dulles, 21S; Eisenhower,
171, 216
Directive to Foreign Ministers, 176
Results :
Address and statement : Dulles, 21S ; Robertson, 691
Exchange of letters (Adenauer, Eisenhower), 259
Review of negotiations, address upon return to U.S.
(Eisenhower), 215
"Spirit of Geneva," address (Eisenhower), 376, 377
U.S. delegation, 49
"Geneva, Spirit of." See "Spirit of Geneva"
Genocide, convention on the prevention and punishment
of the crime of (1948), 368
Geography and History, Pan American Institute of, U.S.
delegation to 6th General Assembly, 288
Geophysical science and foreign relations, address (Ru-
dolph), 989
Geophysical Year, International (1957-1958) :
Address and article: Reichelderfer, 436; Rudolph, 989
U.S. plans for earth-circling satellite, 218
Gerety, Pierce J., 917
German University Exchange Service, 837
Germany:
Assets vested by U.S., proposed U.S. legislation for re-
turn, statement (Murphy), 971
Berlin. See Berlin
Free elections in. See Reunification, infra
Germany in the Free World, address (Murphy), 43
Property, rights, and interests in Austria, Austrian dec-
laration to annul by legislation, 970
Reunification :
Addresses and statement: Conant, 18, 915; Dulles, 8,
524, 525, 964, 965, 1005 : Murphy, 46, 48, 490
Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting, discussions and
proposals concerning. See Geneva Foreign Min-
isters Meeting
Geneva Heads of Government Conference, discussions
and proposals concerning. See Geneva Heads of
Government Conference
North Atlantic Council position, 1047
Soviet position, statements (Dulles), 51, 54
Soviet obligations under 4-power agreements :
Joint statement (U.S., U.K., and France) and note to
Moscow following Soviet agreements of Sept. 20
with East Germany, 559, 616
U.S. position, exchange of notes between U.S. and
Soviet Union, 734
Germany, East :
Inland waterways, British concession to East Germany
for control, statement (Dulles), 1011
Soviet agreements of Sept. 20, position of U.S., U.K., and
France concerning Soviet obligations toward three
powers, 559, 616, 734
Uprising of June 17. anniversary statement (Conant),
15
Germany, Federal Republic of:
Addresses : Conant, 12 ; Kalijarvi, 1058 ; Murphy, 43
Claims. See Claims
Diplomatic relations with Soviet Union, negotiations
concerning, 494
Establishing a business in, Department of Commerce
pamphlet, 886
Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting, preparatory con-
sultations with U.S., U.K., and France, 415, 559
ICAO, admission to membership, 810
Minister of Foreign Affairs, talks with Secretary Dulles,
560
Prisoners of war in Soviet Union, negotiations for re-
lease, 494
Restitution, external, agency established, 355
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Air transport, agreement with U.S., 145, 164
Atomic information, agreement between parties to
NAT for cooperation, 1086
Commercial samples and advertising material, inter-
national convention to facilitate importation, 549
Copyright convention, universal, and related protocols,
163
External debts, German, agreement on, 164, 1024
Friendship, commerce, and navigation, treaty with
U.S., 249
GATT, protocol on terms of accession of Japan, 702
Mutual defense assistance, agreements with U.S., 142,
164
North Atlantic Treaty, protocol on accession to, 406
Occupation regime, protocol on termination of, 406
Property, rights and interests in Germany, charter of
Arbitral Commission on, 442, S13
Tax relief for U.S. expenditures for common defense,
agreement for, 862
Telecommunication convention, international (1952),
442
Tracing Service, International, agreements concern-
ing administration, 289
War criminals, German, procedures for granting of pa-
roles, 887
Glaser, Kurt, 83
Goa, Portuguese dispute with India, statements (Dulles),
263, 1007, 1008
Gold Coast, future relationship to British Togoland, 159
Cork, Haydar, 20
Grant-aid. See Economic and technical aid
Great Lakes fisheries convention with Canada, 678, 770
Greece :
Earthquake, U.S. aid, 100
Cyprus question. See Cyprus question
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Agricultural commodities, agreements with U.S. re-
garding use of proceeds from sale, 210
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55»,
290
Atomic information, agreement between parties to
NAT for cooperation, 1086
Educational exchange program, agreement with U.S.
amending 1948 agreement, S6
GATT, protocols amending, 164, 932
1106
Department of State Bulletin
Greece — Continued
Treaties, agreements, etc. — Continued
Patent rights and technical information for defense
purposes, agreement with U.S., 84, 164
Trade Cooperation, Organization for, agreement on,
164
U.S. personnel in Greece, agreement with U.S. regard-
ing importation of personal effects and equipment,
210
U.S. Refugee Kelief Act visas, cutoff date on applica-
tions announced, 917
Grew, Joseph C, 497
Gruenther, Gen. Alfred M., 609
Guadeloupe, conventions on seamen, 5S9
Guatemala :
Communist activities in, 386, 388, 601
Economic outlook, address (Kalijarvi), 1062
International Bank loan, 307
Military assistance, agreement with U.S., So, 80
Plant protection convention, international, 85
President, visit to U.S., 599, 790
Trade agreement of 1936 with U.S., termination, 577,
623, 695
U.S. aid, 196, 790
Guiana, French, conventions on seamen, 589
Hagerty, James C, 218, 1049
Hahn, Mrs. Lorena B., 206
Haiti :
Artibonite Valley, development of, agreement with U.S.,
369
Economic aid, agreement with U.S. for a joint council to
facilitate administration of emergency assistance
program, 909, 1086
GATT, declaration on continued application of schedules,
769
Military assistance agreements with U.S., 550, 813
Hammnrskjold, Dag, 512
Harrington, Julian F., 249
Hays, Brooks, 672, 711, 804
Heads of Government Conference, Geneva. See Geneva
Heads of Government Conference
Health Organization, World :
Diseases and causes of death, nomenclature regulations,
589
Technical aid to underdeveloped countries, 712
Health, public, agreement with Libya, 1086
Health and sanitation, cooperative program agreements
with —
Colombia, extending 1950 agreement, 400
Ecuador, extending 1950 agreement, 38
El Salvador, extending 1950 agreement, 327
Panama, extending 1951 agreement, 932
Heath, Donald R., 1051
Henderson, Loy, 420, 1051
Hickerson, John D., 678
Highway, Inter-American, U.S. assistance for financing,
598, 898
Highways, Atlantic and Pacific, in Guatemala, Interna-
tional Bank loan for, 307
Hill, Robert C, 722
Index, July to December 1955
History and Geography, Pan American Institute of, U.S.
delegation to 6th General Assembly, 288
Holidays with pay for seamen, convention on, 589
Holland, Henry F., addresses and statements:
Inter-American trade, 654, 959
Responsibility of American Republics in world affairs,
135
Sugar legislation, Department's views on, 120
Treaty of mutual understanding and cooperation witli
Panama, 1S5
U.S. contribution to economic development of Latin
America, 595
Visit to Latin America, departure statement, S97
Hollister, John B. :
Appointment to ICA, 124, 432
Atomic energy, uses for economic and social prugress
in Asia, statement, 747
Visit to Far East, Colombo Plan meeting, 566, 567
Holy See, universal copyright convention and related pro-
tocols, 327
Honduras :
Inter-American convention on granting of political
rights to women, 813
Investment guaranties, agreement with U.S., 86
Hoover, Herbert, Jr. :
Statements :
Air transport agreement with Germany, 145
Bulgarian patriot, anniversary of death, 529
Guatemalan President, departure from Washington,
790
Soviet tanker Tuapse, 302
U.S. delegation to 10th session of General Assembly,
489
Visit to Far East, 566
Hopkins, Frederick Charles, 354
Houghton, Dorothy D., 363
Human rights, advisory services in field of:
Statements (Lord), 1034
U.N. resolution, 1039
Human Rights, U.N. Commission on :
11th session, accomplishments, article (Lord), 277
Recommendations on self-determination and permanent
sovereignty over natural wealth, S08n, 859
Human Rights Day (1955), U.N. proclamation of, 1048
Humphrey, G. M., 432
Hungary :
Assets in U.S., disposition of, 845
Information activities of legation in U.S., suspension by
U.S., 459
United Nations, admission to, 1068, 1070, 1071»i
U.S. Legation local employees, harassment by police,
U.S. protests and countermeasures, 459
ICA. See International Cooperation Administration
ICAO. See International Civil Aviation Organization
Iceland :
Ambassador to U.S., credentials, 916
Radio frequencies, registration, agreement with U.S.,
478
U.S. Ambassador, appointment, 722
ICEM. See Intergovernmental Committee for European
Migration
1107
Immigration :
Administration of U.S. immigration and nationality
laws, change in delegation of authority, 478
Glaser, Kurt, denial of permanent residence status in
U.S., 83
Imports (see also Trade) :
Commercial samples and advertising material, Interna-
tional convention to facilitate importation, 406, 549,
677, 769, 813, 861
Danish import restrictions on U.S. goods, relaxation, 762
Portugal, imports from dollar area, freed list, 542
Private road vehicles, customs convention on temporary
importation, 289, 931
U.S. (see also Tariff policy, U.S.) :
Agriculture, U.S. report to 10th session of GATT of
restrictions on, 1019
Certification of invoices, requirements concerning,
399, 698
Latin Americau, methods to increase, address (Hol-
land), 961, 962
Monkeys, rhesus, for medical research, 398
Strategic materials, chart, 304
Income tax, conventions for avoidance of double taxation.
See Double taxation
India :
Chinese Communist civilians in U.S., good offices for re-
turn of, 456
Economic progress, 269, 1060, 1063
GATT, declaration on continued application of sched-
ules, 164
Goa, dispute with Portugal concerning, statements
(Dulles), 263, 1007, 1008
Korean ex-prisoners of war in, request for financial
assistance, statement (Blaustein), 1077
Monkeys, rhesus, export to U.S., 398
Soviet economic operations in, 347
Telecommunication convention, international (1952),
442
Tariff concessions to U.S., GATT, request tor renegotia-
tion, 26
U.S. aid, 31, 617
Indian Institute, Inter-American, apiwintmeat of U.S.
representative to Governing Board, 247
Indonesia :
Informational media guaranty program, agreement
with U.S., 516
U.N. role in peaceful settlement, 741
Industrial apprenticeship, agreemeut with Brazil extend-
ing 1952 agreement for cooperative program, 368
Industrial education, agreement with Brazil extending
1950 agreement for cooperative program, 249
Industrial productivity, agreement with Uruguay, 38
Industrial property, convention for protection of, 123
Industry, medium and small, agreement with Chile amend-
ing 1952 agreement for cooperative program of tech-
nical assistance, 1086
Information, exchange of, with Soviet Union. See Geneva
Foreign Ministers Meeting and Geneva Heads of Gov-
ernment Conference: East-West contacts
Information activities of Hungarian Legation in U.S., sus-
pension by U.S., 459
Information Agency, U.S. :
Cultural centers, binational, administration of, 358
Program of, need for expansion, 1049
Informational media guaranty program, agreements
with —
Indonesia, 516
Viet-Nam, 998
Inspection plan, mutual. See under Disarmament
Intelligence functions of CIA, address (A. Dulles), 602
Inter- American Bank for Economic Development, U.S.
position on establishment, 140
Inter-American Commission of Women, 10th Assembly,
addresses, article, and messages (Dulles, Eisenhower,
Lee, Rinc6n de Gautier), 584
Inter-American convention on copyrights, 702
Inter-American convention on granting of political rights
to women, 813
Inter-American cultural relations, convention for promo-
tion of, 441
Inter-American Economic and Social Council of OAS, U.S.
representative, 166
Inter-American Highway, U.S. assistance for financing,
598, 898
Inter-American Indian Institute, Governing Board, ap-
pointment of U.S. representative, 247
Inter- American problems, gee Latin America
Interdepartmental Committee on Trade Agreements, no-
tice regarding tariff negotiations, 507, 1020, 1022, 1023
Intergovernmental Committee for European Migration :
Constitution of, 209
Financing problems, article (Warren), 308
Refugees, responsibility for transportation to U.S., 99
3d session of Executive Committee and Council, U.S.
delegation, 634
Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organization,
convention on, 478
Interment of U.S. nationals, agreement with Belgium ex-
tending 1947 agreement, 368
International Astronomical Union, U.S. delegation to 9th
General Assembly, 325
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development:
Articles of agreement, 441
Egypt, Aswan Dam, discussions concerning, 1050
Loans to : Guatemala, 307 ; Latin America, 597, 961, 962 ;
Lebanon, 427 ; Pakistan, 398 ; Peru, 338
U.S. views on annual report, statement (Waugh), 626
International Civil Aviation Organization :
Conventions regarding, 123
Germany, Federal Republic of, admission to member-
ship, 810
Meetings :
Committee on Rules for the Settlement of Differences,
440
Diplomatic conference on amendment of the Warsaw
Convention, 440
Facilitation Division, 4th session, 588
International Cooperation Administration (see also
Foreign Operations Administration) :
Appointment of Deputy Director for Congressional Re-
lations, 910
Economic officers, meeting, 454
1108
Department of State Bulletin
International Cooperation Administration — Continued
Educational exchange program, study of relationship to
State Department exchange program, 906
Establishment and functions, 124, 432, 767
International Council of Scientific Unions, U.S. delega-
tion to 7th General Assembly, 325
International Court of Justice :
Document, 248
Statute of, declarations recognizing compulsory jurisdic-
tion, 769, 1024
U.N. Administrative Tribunal, judgments, statements on
U.S. position regarding procedure (Merrow) and
text of General Assembly resolution, 938
U.S. aircraft case against Soviet Union (1952), U.S.
application to Court, 65
International Development Advisory Board, members, 493
International Finance Corp., 598, 627, 858
International Geophysical Year (1957-1958) :
Address and article : Reiehelderfer, 436 ; Rudolph, 989
U.S. plans for earth-circling satellite, 21S, 990
International Joint Commission, U.S. and Canada:
Columbia River power development, Canadian proposals
and U.S. position, statements by Commission and
U.S. chairman, 980
St. Croix River Basin, investigation of water resources,
21
International Labor Conference, 38th session, convention
concerning abolition of penal sanctions for breaches
of contract of employment, 406
International Monetary Fund, articles of agreement, 163,
441
International North Pacific Fisheries Commission, meet-
ing, 357
International organizations, application of universal copy-
right convention to works of, 163, 326, 327, 328, 441
International Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission, re-
port on destructive effect of power projects on Fraser
River salmon, 984, 9S5
International Tracing Service, agreements concerning ad-
ministration, 289
Investment activity abroad, Soviet, 343, 344, 345, 348
Investment of private capital abroad :
Antitrust policies, effect on U.S. investments, 538, 540
Argentina, incentives for U.S. capital, 462
Asia, South and Southeast, recommendations of Colombo
Plan meeting, 992
International Finance Corp. as stimulus to, 858
Investment guaranties agreements with —
Bolivia, 769; Colombia, 998; Honduras, 86; Ireland,
770 ; Paraguay, 998
Latin America, addresses: Beaulac, 336; Holland, 596,
960, 963
Natural wealth and resources of nations, proposals con-
cerning self-determination and permanent sover-
eignty over, 808, 809, 859, S92, 893
Statements concerning: Hays, 713; Kalijarvi, 850;
Waugh, 627
Underdeveloped countries, 267, 272, 858
U.S. tax incentives, proposed legislation, 432, 597
Investors and traders, agreement with Philippines relat-
ing to, 476, 478
Invoices, certification of, regulations eliminating, 399
Iran :
Amity, economic relations, and consular rights, treaty
with U. S., 367, 369
Attitude toward West, 683
Baghdad Pact, adherence, 653
Iraq :
Civil aviation convention, international, protocols re-
lating to permanent seat and sessions of ICAO, 123
Military assistance agreement with U.S., agreement for
disposition of equipment and materials, 328
Peace treaty with Japan, 368, 442
Ireland :
Guaranties against risks respecting inconvertibility of
currencies and expropriation, agreement with U.S.,
770
United Nations, admission to, 1067, 1068, 1070, 1071n
Isle of Man, convention to facilitate importation of com-
mercial samples and advertising material, 861
Israel :
Aircraft, destruction by Bulgaria, U.S. protest and Bul-
garian note of regret, 263, 354
American-Israel friendship, address (Brownell), 97
Arab-Israeli dispute. Sec Arab-Israeli dispute
Arms supply policy. See Arms supply
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Agricultural surpluses, agreements with U.S., 86,
1086
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 164
Slavery convention (1926), protocol amending and
annex, 590
Italy :
Soviet investment operations in, 344
Tariff concessions to U.S., GATT, renegotiation of, 578
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Agricultural commodities, agreement with U.S., 249
Arbitral Commission on property, rights and interests
in Germany, charter of, 442
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 290
Atomic information, agreement for cooperation be-
tween parties to NAT, 623
Child feeding programs, agreement with U.S., 225, 249
Double taxation, conventions with U.S. for avoidance
of, estates and income, 290, 442
Educational exchange programs, financing agreement
with U.S. amending 1948 agreement, 210
GATT, protocol on terms of accession of Japan, 702
Geneva conventions (1949), reservation to, 74
Industrial property, convention for protection of, 123
Jet engines, agreement with U.S. for facilities for re-
pair, 249
Plant protection convention, international, 589
Telecommunication convention, international, 677
United Nations, admission to, 1067, 1068, 1070, 1071»
U.S. tariff concession to, GATT, 616
Venice Film Festival, question of entering Blackboard
Jungle, 537
Jackson, William H., 529, 778
Jacome, Alexander G., 247
Jameson, Guilford S., 910
Index, July fo December 1955
1109
Japan :
Assets vested by U.S., proposed U.S. legislation for re-
turn of, 119, 971
Communist threat of subversion, 694, 755
Cotton purchase in U.S., Export-Import Bank credit, 263
Cotton textile exports to U.S., question of protective re-
strictions by U.S., correspondence (Dulles, Smith),
1064
Foreign Minister, visit to U.S. :
Announcement, 263
Arrival statement, 420
Joint statement with Secretary Dulles, 419
Fur seals, North Pacific, international conference for
conservation of, 437
Korean-Japanese tension over so-called "Rhee" line,
statement (Dulles), 1009
Trade problems, addresses and article: Kalijarvi,
1058 ; Murphy, 492 ; Waugh, 303
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Agricultural commodities, agreements with U.S., 86,
577
Aircraft assembly or manufacture, agreement with
U.S., 210
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S. for
cooperation, 55», 909
Children, convention fixing minimum age for em-
ployment at sea, 1024
Commercial samples and advertising material, inter-
national convention to facilitate importation, 406
Customs facilities for touring, multilaterial conven-
tion, 516
GATT. See Tariffs and trade, general agreement on
Mutual defense assistance agreement with U.S., agree-
ment for Japanese financial contributions under, 290
Peace treaty :
Ratification by Iraq, 368
Settlement of disputes arising under article 15 (a),
agreement for, 442
Seafarers, convention concerning medical examina-
tion of, 1024
U.S. aircraft, agreement with U.S. for payment of
damages to property of Japanese nationals, 998
U.N. membership, U.S. efforts for and Soviet vetos, 1067,
1068, 1070, 1071, 1071m, 1072, 1072», 1073
War claims of American nationals against, 972
War criminals, release of, 420, 421
John Marshall Bicentennial, 133, 375, 449
Johnson, U. Alexis, 219, 220, 456
Johnston, Eric, 340
Joint Council for Economic Aid, agreement with Haiti es-
tablishing, 1086
Jones, Howard P., 166
Jordan :
United Nations, admission to, 1067, 1068, 1070, 1071n
World Meteorological Organization, convention of, 210
Jordan, Len, 981
Kalijarvi, Thorsten V. :
Addresses and statement:
Antitrust policies of U.S., relation to foreign trade
and investment, 538
Foreign economic policy of U.S., 846
Kalijarvi, Thorsten V. — Continued
Addresses and statement — Continued
World economic situation, review of, 1057
Colombo Plan meeting, 514, 567
Karachi, port facilities, World Bank loan for improvement,
398
Keesing, Felix M., 300
Key, David McK., 125
Khouri, Victor, 916
Khrushchev, Nikita, 603, 611, 1007, 1056
King, Spencer M., 478
Korea :
Armistice agreement:
Communist violations of, address, letter, and state-
ments: Blaustein, 1076, 1078, 1080, 1082, 1084;
Parks, 191, 396 ; Robertson, 693
Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission. See Neu-
tral Nations Supervisory Commission
Soviet and Polish charges of violation, refutation,
1080, 1081
U.N. Command, reduction in strength, 1076, 1080, 1084
Belgian participation in U.N. operations, agreement to
pay U.S. for logistic support, 189, 210
Free elections, efforts for. See Unification, infra
Geneva conventions on treatment of prisoners of war,
etc., application in Korean conflict, 75
Unification :
General Assembly resolution on, 1081, 1085 (text)
Soviet proposals, 1079
Statements on (Dulles), 51, 341
U.N. actions and deliberations regarding :
Addresses and statements : Blaustein, 1074 ; Lodge,
737, 739; Wilcox, 741
General Assembly resolution, 10S5
U.S. position, statements (Blaustein), 1075, 1076,
1077, 1078
U.N. Commission for Unification and Rehabilitation of
Korea, subcommittee, 1077
Korea, Republic of:
Communism, efforts to combat, 755
Economic and military discussions with U.S., joint
communique, 356
Economic recovery, progress in, address (Kalijarvi),
1059
Exhibition of photographs of national treasures, 917
Foreign Language Institute, 506
Japanese-Korean tension over so-called "Rhee" line,
statement (Dulles), 1009
Prisoners of war. See Prisoners of war
Taxation of U.S. businessmen, 618
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Agreed minute of 1954, amendment establishing ex-
change rate, 356
Arsenal, agreement with U.S. for establishment of
facilities for, 164
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55»i
International Bank for Reconstruction and Develop-
ment, articles of agreement, 441
International Monetary Fund, articles of agreement,
441
Naval vessels, agreement with U.S. for loan of, 550
1110
Department of State Bulletin
Korea, Republic of — Continued
U.N. Korean Reconstruction Agency, report of Agent
General, statement (Hays) and U.N. draft resolu-
tion, 672
U.N. membership, U.S. position and Soviet veto, 1068,
1069, 1070ji
U.S. aid, 190, 398
Kotschnig, Walter M., 317
Krekeler, Dr. Heinz L., 19, 47
Labor, penal sanctions for breaches of contract of em-
ployment, convention concerning abolition of, 406
Labor Conference, International, 38th session, convention
concerning abolition of penal sanctions for breaches
of contract of employment, 406
Labor services, technical, agreement with El Salvador for
cooperative program, 406
Langley, James M., 464
Laos:
Ambassador to U.S., credentials, 916
Communist threat of subversion, 694
Legation in U.S., elevation to embassy status, 299
United Nations, admission to, 1067, 1068, 1070, 1071n
U.S. aid to famine victims, 536
U.S. ambassador, confirmation, 249
U.S. Legation in, elevation to embassy status, 299
Lathrum, Wade, 329
Latin America (see also Inter-American and individual
countries) :
Coffee trade, addresses: Holland, 656, 962; Kalijarvi,
1062
Cultural centers, bina'tional, U.S. assistance to, 35S
Economic outlook, address (Kalijarvi), 1061, 1063
Economic relations with U.S., addresses : Beaulac, 335 ;
Holland, 595, 897
Land settlement projects for European migrants, 311
Responsibility of the American Republics in world af-
fairs, address (Holland), 135
Trade relations with U.S., addresses (Holland), 654, 959
Travel, promotion of, to and within Latin America, 107
U.N. Economic Commission for, U.S. delegation to 6th
session, 405
U. S. aid :
Export-Import Bank loans, 597, 960, 961. 963
Mutual security programs, 33, 269
U. S. officials visit to discuss inter-American problems,
delegation and departure statement (Holland),
791, 897
Women, economic and social progress, article and ad-
dress (Lee), 584, 5S6
Lausanne Peace Conference, 1922-23, effect on consolida-
tion of Turkish Republic, 497
Law, international, development of, as a basis for peace,
address (Stassen), 416
Law, progress in the rule of, address (Phleger), 647
Lawrence, Ernest O., 706
Lebanon :
Ambassador to U.S., credentials, 916
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 210
Telecommunication convention, international, and final
and additional protocols, 164
World Bank loan, 427
Lee, Mrs. Frances M„ 584, 586
Le Gallais, Hugues, 916
Legislation. See under Congress
Lend-lease operations, transmittal of President's report
to Congress, 760
Libby, Willard F., 381
Liberia, technical cooperation agreement with U.S., 770
Libya :
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Agriculture, agreement with U.S. for cooperative pro-
gram, 1086
Economic aid, agreement with U.S. amending 1954
agreement, 210
Education, agreement with U.S. for cooperative pro-
gram, 1086
Natural resources, agreement with U.S. for coopera-
tive program, 10S6
Public health, agreement with U.S. for cooperative
program, 1086
Technical cooperation, general agreement with U. S.,
328
Technical cooperation, point 4 agreement with U.S.
superseded by general agreement, 328
Wheat agreement with U. S., 328
United Nations, admission to, 1067, 1068, 1070, 1071n
U.S. aid, wheat relief, 263, 328, 427
Lindbeck, John M. H., 751
Literary and artistic works, protection of. See Copyright
Litoshko, Evgeni V., 134
Loans, U.N. See International Bank
Loans, U.S. (see also Export-Import Bank), agreement
with Republic of China, 307
Lodge, Henry Cabot, Jr. :
Addresses and statements :
Algerian question, proposed inscription on General
Assembly agenda, U.S. position, 545, 582, 992
Armaments, problems of inspection and control of,
1033
Atomic radiation, effects on human health, proposal
for collation of data on, 54
China, representation in U.N., 544
Cyprus question, proposed inscription on General As-
sembly agenda, U.S. position, 545
Disarmament, President Eisenhower's proposals for
inspection, 438, 528, 765
Freedom, Responsibility, and Law, 696
Moroccan question, postponement of discussion by
U.N., U.S. position, 1040
Palestine question, 458
Soviet item on relaxing international tension, pro-
posed inscription on General Assembly agenda, U.S.
position, 583
United Nations, admission of new members, U. S. po-
sition, 1067
United Nations after 10 years, 736
Correspondence :
Atomic radiation effects, request for agenda item for
10th session of General Assembly, 365
Peaceful uses of atomic energy, international coop-
eration, request for General Assembly item, 384
UNICEF, U.S. contribution, 513
Lonardi, Maj. Gen. Eduardo, 560
Index, July to December J 955
1111
Lord, Mrs. Oswald B., 277, 808, 1034
Luce, Mrs. Clare Boothe, 537, 1010
Luxembourg :
Ambassador to U.S., credentials, 016
Legation in U.S., elevation to embassy status, 478
Tariff concessions by U.S., 226, 228, 231
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Atomic information, agreement between parties to
NAT for cooperation regarding, 442
Civil aviation convention, international, protocols
relating to permanent seat and sessions of ICAO,
123
Copyright convention, universal, and related proto-
cols, 327
GATT, declaration on continued application of sched-
ules, 164
Geneva conventions (1949), reservation to, 74
Off-shore procurement program, agreements with U.S.,
678
Opium, protocol regulating production, trade, and use
of (1953), 289
Private property, war damage to, agreement with U.S.,
124, 150
U.S. Ambassador, appointment, 516
U.S. Legation in, elevation to embassy status, 478
Lyon, Cecil B., 38
Macomber, William B., Jr., 768
Malaya, Communist subversion in, 694
Manila Pact, address (Dulles), 526
Maniu, Juliu, 786
Mann, Thomas C, 678
Maritime Consultative Organization, Intergovernmental,
convention on, 478
Marshall, John, Bicentennial. 13::, 375, 449
Marshall Islands, resettlement of displaced persons, 158
Martinique, convention on seamen, 589
Marx, Walter J., 447
Matsu and Quemoy Islands, Communist buildup of air-
fields near, statement (Dulles), 1009
McDevitt, James A., 125
Mcllvaine, Robinson, 537
McLeod, Scott, 309, 311, 568, 634
McMahon, Brien, 696
McNaughton, Gen. A. G. L., 981, 982, 983
McQueen, Lt. James T., 1012»
Meagher, John P., 953
Medicine :
Atomic medical facilities in U.S., tour by foreign doc-
tors, 264
Medical films exchange, agreement with Soviet Union.
785, 932
Medical research, agreement with Republic of China
relating to establishment of U.S. Navy unit in
Taipei, Formosa, 862
Merrow, Rep. Chester E., 715, 938
Meteorological Organization, World. See World Meteor-
ological Organization
Mexico :
Binational cultural center, U.S. and Mexico, 359
Claims, final payment to U.S. under 1941 convention, 806
Mexico — Continued
Industrial property, convention for protection of, 123
U.S. aid in Tampico disaster, 791
Micronesia, report on U.S. administration of trust terri-
tory, statements (Nucker), 153
Middle East. See Near and Middle East
Military and Defense Commissions, Joint Brazil-U.S., con-
tinuation agreement, 769
Military assistance (see also Military missions, Mutual
defense, and Mutual security and other assistance
programs) :
Agreements, with —
Cambodia, 290 ; Guatemala, 85, 86 ; Haiti, 550 ; Yugo-
slavia, 770
Agreements regarding disposition of equipment, mate-
rials, and property, with —
I lominican Republic, 406; Haiti, 813; Iraq, 328; Peru,
164; Thailand, 290; Yugoslavia, 86
U.S. program, readjustments, 266
Military blueprints, President Eisenhower's proposals for
exchange. See Disarmament: Aerial inspection
Military dependents' housing and tobacco, agreement with
U.K., 623
Military facilities, importation of personal effects, equip-
ment of U.S. personnel, agreement with Greece, 210
Military information, exchange of. See Disarmament:
Aerial inspection
Military missions, U.S. :
Agreements regarding duties of Army, Navy, and Air
Force missions with —
Colombia, 678 ; Cuba, 516, 590 ; Ecuador, 998
Army mission agreements, with —
Bolivia, extending 1942 agreement, 550
Cuba, extending 1951 agreement, 38
Paraguay, extending, amending 1943 agreement, 369
Military program, U.S. See Mutual defense, Mutual secu-
rity, and National Defense
Mohammed V of Morocco, 894, 1040
Molotov, Vyacheslav M., 605, 606, 784
Monaco :
Copyright convention, universal, and protocols 1 and 2,
163
Postal convention, universal, 813
Monetary Fund, International, articles of agreement, 163,
441
Mongolia, Outer, U.N. membership, Soviet efforts for and
U.S. position on, 1008, 1068, 1070, 1071», 1072n, 1073
Monkeys, rhesus, export from India to U.S., 398
Moore, Roger Allan, 575
Morocco, French :
Mohammed V, return to Morocco, 894, 1040
Safety of life at sea convention, 249
U.N. consideration of Moroccan question :
General Assembly resolution to postpone, 1041
Statement (Lodge), 1040
Morocco, Spanish Zone, universal postal convention, 210
Morrill, J. L., 966
Morton, Thruston B., 79, 561
Moulton, Harold, 706
Muccio, John J., 722
Mulcahey, Edward W., 285
Murphy, Edmund R., 358
1112
Department of State Bulletin
Murphy, Robert :
Addresses and statements:
American nationals' claims against Germany, pro-
posed legislation for payment, 971
Cauadian-U.S. relations, current aspects of, 411
Education for Today's World, 1054
European security, progress toward, 834
Geneva conventions on prisoners of war, etc.
(1949), 69
German and Japanese vested assets in U.S., proposed
legislation for return, 971
Germany in the Free World, 43
Self-determination in international relations, prin-
ciple of, 889
NATO status of forces agreement, 17S
U.S. foreign policy, review of, 490
Visit to Yugoslavia, 566
Mutual defense, regional organizations, address (Hol-
land), 137
Mutual defense assistance agreements (see also Military
missions), with —
Belgium, agreement amending annex B, 550
France, agreement for disposition of equipment, 99S
Germany, Federal Republic of, 142, 164
Japan, agreement for financial contributions, 290
Turkey, agreement relating to equipment and materials,
290
Mutual Defense Assistance Control Act :
Administration, statement (DeLany), 919, 920, 921
FOA report to Congress on operation (July-Dec. 1954),
excerpts, 342
Mutual defense treaties and agreements (see also Baghdad
Pact, Collective security, Mutual security, National
defense, North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and
Southeast Asia Treaty Organization) :
Address (Phleger), 649
Atomic information, exchange of, agreements with
Canada and U.K., letters (Eisenhower, Wilson) and
texts, 59
China, Republic of, 756, 757
Distant early warning system, agreement with Canada,
22
Far East, 756, 757
Patent rights and technical information, exchange of,
agreements with Greece, Netherlands, and Norway,
84
Western European Union, 44, 417
Mutual Security Act (1955), 273
Mutual security and other assistance programs (sec also
Agricultural surpluses. Economic and technical aid,
Military assistance, and Mutual defense) :
Defense support to Spain and Yugoslavia, 31
Far East, article (Lindbeck), 759
FOA, final report to President (Jan. 1953-June 1955),
265
Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting, effect on U.S. pro-
grams, statement (Dulles), 870
President's report to Congress (Jan. 1-June 30, 1955),
excerpt, 428
Southeast Asia, ANZUS Council, meeting and state-
ment, 534
Statement (Stassen) on 1956 program, 29
Mutual Security Appropriation Act (1956), Executive
order implementing and statement (Eisenhower),
273, 362
Mutual understanding and cooperation, treaty with Pan-
ama, 1S5, 290, 406, 516
NAC. See North Atlantic Council
Narcotic drugs. See Drugs, narcotic
Nasser, Col. Gamal Abdel, 684
NAT. See North Atlantic Treaty
National City Bank v. Republic of China, question of
Chinese immunity, 750
National defense and security (see also Collective
security; Mutual defense; and Mutual security) :
Address (Dulles) 640
Bipartisan discussion by President and congressional
leaders, 1049
Distant early warning system, U.S.-Canada :
Texts of notes, 22
U.S.-Canadian inspection of installations, 495
Intelligence and law enforcement agencies, cooperation
against Communist subversion, address (A. Dulles),
600
Permanent Joint Board on Defense, U.S.-Canada, 412
Personnel security program, U.S., address (McLeod),
568
Restrictions on photography, sketching, etc., by Rumani-
ans in U.S., 105
Strategic materials, release of stockpile in event of
enemy attack, 701
U.S. military programs, effect on, by Geneva Foreign
Ministers Meeting, statement (Dulles), 870
National Olympic Day, proclamation, 702
Nationality of women, convention on, 550
NATO. See North Atlantic Treaty Organization
Natural resources, agreement with Libya for cooperative
program, 10S6
Natural wealth and resources, permanent sovereignty over,
U.S. position, 808, 859, S92, 893
Nauru, administration as trust territory, 282
Navigation, treaty of friendship, commerce and navigation
with Germany, 249
Near and Middle East (see also individual countries) :
Arab-Israeli dispute. See Arab-Israeli dispute
Arms supply to. See Arms supply.
Collective security (see also Baghdad Pact), addresses:
Brownell, 99 ; Dulles, 378, 379 ; Murphy, 493
Economic progress, address (Kalijarvi), 1060
Foreign, Relations, volume on, published, 165
Johnston, Eric, mission to, 340
U.S. economic aid, statements : Dulles, 965 ; Stassen, 32
U.S. policy in, addresses and statements : Allen, 6S3 ;
Dulles, 378, 421, 6S8 ; Eisenhower, 845
Vice President Nixon, visit of, 380
Nelsen, Ancher, 907
Nepal, admission to U.N., 1067, 106S, 1070, 1071w
Netherlands :
Refugee program, U.N., financial contributions, 630
Tariff concessions by U.S., GATT, 226, 228, 231
Tariff concessions to U.S., GATT. request for renego-
tiation, 26
Index, July to December 1955
1113
Netherlands — Continued
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Aircraft, imported, arrangement with U.S. relating to
certificates of airworthiness, 909
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55»,
210
Double taxation on income, 1948 convention with U.S.
for avoidance of, extension to Antilles, 37, 38, 290,
442, 907, 909
Facilities assistance program, agreement with U.S.,
210
GATT, declaration on continued application of
schedules and protocols amending, 164, 702
Patent rights and technical information, agreement
with U.S. on exchange of, 84, 210
Property rights and interests in Germany, charter of
Arbitral Commission on, 813
Safety of life at sea convention (1948), 677
Slavery convention (1926), protocol amending and
annex, 327
Trade Cooperation, Organization for, agreement on,
702
WHO Regulations, nomenclature of diseases and
causes of death, 5S9
Netherlands Antilles :
Double taxation convention, U.S. -Netherlands, 37, 38,
290, 440, 907, 909
Safety of life at sea convention (194S), 677
WHO Regulations, nomenclature of diseases and causes
of death, 5S9
Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission (Korea) :
Communist obstructions to work of, 1076, 1081, 1082,
1083, 10S4, 1085
South Korean objection to, statement (Dulles), 298
U.S. attitude on modification of operations of, 340
Neutrality, Austrian, U.S. recognition of, U.S. and Austrian
notes, 1011
Neutrality, Soviet theory and U.S. views, 641, 642
New Guinea, administration as trust territory, 283
New Zealand :
ANZUS Council, meeting and statement, 357, 534
GATT, declaration on continued application of sched-
ules and protocols amending, 164, 931
Geneva conventions (1949), reservation to, 74
German external debts, agreement on, 1024
Intergovernmental Committee for European Migration,
constitution of, 210
Nicaragua :
Costa Rican dispute, conciliation of, OAS Council reso-
lution and committee report, 546
Nationality of women, convention on, 550
Tariff concessions to U.S., GATT, request for renego-
tion, 26
Nigeria, Minister of Transport, visit to U.S., 495
Nixon, Richard M., visit to Near East and Africa, 380
Nonintervention, principle of, U.S. policy, 138
Non-Self-Governing Territories, Committee on Informa-
tion from :
Statement on report (Bell), 673
U.S. efforts for continuation, statement (Bell) , 906, 907»
Non-self-governing territories (see also Self-determina-
tion and Trust territories), U.N. action, 1954, report
to Congress (Eisenhower), 393
North Atlantic Council, 4th ministerial meeting of 1955 :
Departure statement (Dulles), 1048
Pinal communique, 1047
North Atlantic Treaty:
Atomic information, agreement between parties for co-
operation, current actions, 442, 478, 623, 813, 931,
1024, 1086
Germany, Federal Republic of, protocol on accession of,
406
International military headquarters, protocol on status
of, 998
National representatives and international staff, agree-
ment on status, 998
Status of forces agreement:
Basic issues, statement (Murphy), 178
Current actions, 328, 998
North Atlantic Treaty Organization:
Addresses and statement: Dulles, 262, 1005; Gruenther,
609 ; Murphy, 835 ; Wright, 699
Agreements and protocols. See North Atlantic Treaty
Defense planning, NAC actions, 1047
Fellowship and scholarship program, 735
German membership, question of, addresses and state-
ments : Conant, 12 ; Dulles, 729, 781 ; Murphy, 44.
Progress under mutual security program, 266, 271, 428
U.S. military forces, relations with French local com-
munities, address (Dillon), 1014
North Atlantic union, proposed congressional resolution,
views (Dulles), 224
North Pacific Fisheries Commission, International, meet-
ing, 357
North Pacific Fur Seal Conference, meeting and U.S. dele-
gation, 437, 952
"Northern tier" pact. See Baghdad Pact
Norway :
Atomic information, agreement between parties to NAT
for cooperation, 1086
Educational exchange program, agreement with U.S.
amending 1949 agreement, 37, S6
GATT, declaration on continued application of sched-
ules, 164
Patent rights and technical information, agreement with
U.S. on exchange of, 84
Nu, U, 50, 95, 96
Nucker, Delmas H., 153
Nuclear energy. See Atomic energy
Nuesse, Celestine Joseph, 575
Nutting, Antony, 709
Nyasaland. See Rhodesia and Nyasaland, Federation of.
OAS. See Organization of American States
Oats, U.S. import quotas, expiration of, 543
Occupation regime, protocol on termination of in Federal
Republic of Germany, 406
O'Connor, Roderic L., 678
Off-shore procurement program, agreements with —
Luxembourg, 678
Turkey, 32S
1114
Department of State Bulletin
Oil shale study, agreement with Brazil extending agree-
ment for technical assistance, 861
Olympic Day, National, proclamation, 702
"Open sky" proposals of President Eisenhower. See Dis-
armament : Aerial inspection
Opium, protocol regulating production, trade, and use of
(1953), 86, 2S9, 442
Organization for Trade Cooperation :
Agreement on, signatures, 164, 368, 702, 931
GATT, 10th session, reports on plans for, 1020
U.S. membership:
Addresses and statements : Bonbright, 860 ; Eisen-
hower, 26; Kalijarvi, 848; Thibodeaux, 110, 112,
113 ; Waugh, 305
Congressional hearings postponed, letters (Cooper,
Eisenhower), 188
Organization of American States :
Appointment of alternate U.S. representative, 589
Charter of, 589
Costa Rican-Niearaguan dispute, committee report and
Council resolution terminating action under Rio
treaty, 546
Settlement of inter-American problems, addresses :
Dulles, 525 ; Holland, 138
Ostertag, Rep. Harold C, 1012m
OTC. See Organization for Trade Cooperation
Outer Mongolia, U.N. membership, Soviet efforts for and
U.S. position on, 1008, 1068, 1070, 1071n, 1072w, 1073
Pacific, North, International Fisheries Commission, meet-
ing, 357
Pacific and Atlantic Highways, International Bank loan
to Guatemala, 307
Pacific Islands, Trust Territory of. See tinder Trust ter-
ritories
Pacific settlement, American treaty on, 590
Pact of Bogota, 590
Pact of mutual cooperation. See Baghdad Pact
Pakistan :
Ambassador to U.S., credentials, 916
Port facilities at Karachi, World Bank loan for im-
provement, 398
Tariff concessions to U.S., GATT, request for renegotia-
tion, 26
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Agricultural commodities, agreement with U.S., 678
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55w,
328
Baghdad Pact, 534
GATT, declaration on continued application of sched-
ules, 164
GATT, protocol on terms of accession of Japan, 164
GATT, rectifications and modifications to annexes and
text of schedules, 4th protocol, 368
Slavery convention (1926), 769
Palestine question. See Arab-Israeli dispute
Pan American Institute of Geography and History, U.S.
delegation to 6th General Assembly, 288
Panama :
Agriculture, agreement with U.S. extending 1952 agree-
ment for cooperative program, 932
Panama — Continued
Education, agreement with U.S. extending 1950 agree-
ment for cooperative program, 932
Health and sanitation, agreement with U.S. extending
1951 agreement for cooperative program, 932
Mutual understanding and cooperation, treaty with
U.S. and memorandum of understandings, 185, 290,
406, 516
U.S. Ambassador, confirmation, 249
Panama Canal, revision of U.S. Panamanian treaty rela-
tions, 185, 290, 406, 516
Paraguay :
Road construction, U. S. training program, 177
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Air Force mission, agreement with U.S. extending
and amending 1943 agreement, 406
Army mission, agreement with U.S. extending and
amending 1943 agreement, 369
Investment guaranties, agreement with U.S., 998
UNESCO constitution, 368
Tung oil, limit on export to U.S. discontinued, 792
Paris agreements on European security, German ratifica-
tion of, and Soviet opposition to, 47
Parks, Maj. Gen. Harland C, 191, 396
Passports, removal of U.S. restrictions on travel to Euro-
pean Soviet-bloc countries, 777
Pastore, Sen. John O., 366, 660, 796, 1030
Patent rights and technical information for defense pur-
poses, agreements to facilitate interchange of, signed
with —
Greece, 84, 164
Netherlands, 84, 210
Norway, S4
Patriotism, address (Dulles), 639
Peace :
Addresses and statements on : Dulles, 218, 642 ; Eisen-
hower, 5, 131, 215, 375; Phleger, 647; Robertson,
690 ; Stassen, 416 ; Strauss. 558
Joint statement (Eisenhower, Nu), 97
U.S. Congress, resolution on renewed efforts for, 4
Uniting for Peace resolution, U.N., 649
World Peace Council, history of, letters (Morton,
Powell), 79
Peace Conference of Lausanne, 1922-23, effect on con-
solidation of Turkish Republic, article (Grew), 497
Peace treaty, Japan, Mils, 442
Peaceful settlement of disputes. See Disputes
Pearson, Lester, 704
Penal sanctions for breaches of contract of employment,
convention concerning abolition of, 406
Permanent Joint Board on Defense, U.S.-Canada, 412
Personnel, Public Committee on, meeting, 1053
Persons, exchange of. See Exchange of persons
Peru:
Fishery resources of southeastern Pacific, conservation,
meeting with U.S., Chile, and Ecuador, 384, 513, 1025
Highway maintenance, World Bank loan for, 33S
Tariff concessions to U.S., GATT, renegotiation of, 578
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55n.
Education program, agreement with U.S., extension, 38
Index, July to December 1955
1115
Peru — Continued
Treaties, agreements, etc. — Continued
GATT, declaration on continued application of sched-
ules, 702
GATT, protocol on terms of accession of Japan, 769
Military assistance agreement, agreement on disposi-
tion of U.S. equipment and materials, 164
Military missions, agreement with U.S. for perform-
ance of duties by members of, 909
Surplus agricultural commodities, agreements with
U.S. amending Feb. 7, 1955, agreement, 210
Petkov, Nikola, 529
Petroleum products pipeline, construction, agreement
with Canada, 623
Philippine-American Day, 974
Philippines :
Ambassador to U.S., credentials, 916
Communism, resistance to, article (Lindbeck), 755
Sugar legislation, U.S., effects of proposed revision of
Sugar Act on imports of Philippine sugar, 122
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55n,
249
Copyright convention, universal, and protocols, 1, 2,
and 3, 441
Opium, protocol regulating production, trade, and use
of (1953), 86
Public schools within U.S. Naval Reservation at Subic
Bay, agreement concerning administration by
Philippine Department of Education, 862
Slavery convention (1926), 368
Telecommunication convention, international, and
related protocols (1952), 289
Trade agreement with U.S. (1946), revision. See
Trade agreements
Traders and investors, agreement with U.S. relating
to, 476, 478
U.S. policy regarding, address (Ferguson), 974
Phillips, Christopher H., 255
Phleger, Herman, 647
Photography, restrictions on, U.S. and Rumanian notes,
105
Pinay, Antoine, 705
Plant protection convention, international, 85, 931
Plastic works of art, restrictions on, U.S. and Rumanian
notes, 105
Point 4 agreement with Libya, superseded by general
agreement for technical cooperation, 32S
Poland, universal postal convention, 86
Political rights to women, inter-American convention for
granting, 813
Portugal :
Goa, Portuguese dispute with India, statements
(Dulles), 263, 1007, 1008
Imports from dollar area, freed list, 542
Minister of Foreign Affairs, .joint communique on con-
versations with U.S. officials, 966
Prime Minister, visit to U.S., 653
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55re,
249
Portugal — Continued
Treaties, agreements, etc. — Continued
Atomic information, agreement between parties to
NAT for cooperation, 1024
Geneva conventions (1949), reservation to, 75
NATO international military headquarters, protocol
on status of, 998
NATO national representatives and international
staff, agreement on status of, 99S
NATO status of forces agreement, 998
Plant protection, international convention for, 931
United Nations, admission to, 1067, 1068, 1070, 1071m
Postal convention, universal, current actions, 86, 210, 769,
813
Prisoners of war, Geneva conventions on treatment of.
See Geneva conventions
Prisoners of war, German, Soviet agreement to release, 494
Prisoners of war, Korea :
Communist illegal detention of, statement (Blaustein),
107S
Geneva conventions (1949), application to, 71, 75
Indian request for financial assistance for ex-prisoners
in India, statement (Blaustein), 1077
Nonrepatriated, joint statement on status by Depart-
ments of Defense, Justice, and State, 20
Prisoners of war, U.S., detention and release by Com-
munist China :
Address and statements: Dulles, 220, 221, 262, 527;
Eisenhower, 262; Lodge, 738, 739; Phillips, 258;
Wilcox, 901
U.N. action, 1954, report to Congress (Eisenhower), 386,
390
U.N. Command personnel, release of, report (Hammar-
skjold), 512
Private enterprise in Latin America, address (Holland),
960, 962, 963
Private property, war damage to, agreement with Luxem-
bourg, 124
Prochnow, Herbert V., 567, 678
Proclamations by the President :
Bicycles, imported, increased duty on, 400
Clover seed, alsike, modification of import quota, 116
Copyright convention, universal, and protocols 1, 2, and
3, 326
Courts of foreign forces in U.S., proclamation revoking
1944 proclamation, 361
Filberts, shelled, modification of restrictions on imports,
275
Human Rights Day (1955), U.N., 104S
Japan, protocol of accession to GATT, 226
John Marshall Bicentennial Month, 133
National Olympic Day, 702
Eye imports, quota, 117
Trade agreements, with —
Ecuador, termination of 1938 agreement, 511
Guatemala, termination of 1936 agreement, 695
Philippines, revision of 1946 agreement, 76S
Switzerland, supplementary agreement, 113
Productivity, industrial, agreement with Uruguay, 38
Propaganda, Communist. See under Communism
1116
Department of State Bulletin
Property, U.S. Government, in Austria, agreement with
Austria regarding disposition, 677
Property rights and interests in Germany, charter of
Arbitral Commission on, 442, S13
Protocol functions of State Department, address (Sim-
mons), 93
Public Committee on Personnel, meeting, 1053
Publications :
Commerce Department, Establishing a Business in the
Federal Republic of Germany and Western Berlin,
published, 886
Congress, lists of current legislation on foreign policy,
34, 152, 329, 357, 402, 434, 455, 495, 814
Proposals for freer exchange at Geneva Foreign Min-
isters Meeting and Soviet rejection, 776, 780, S77,
880
Santiago Negotiations on Fishery Conservation Prob-
lems, published, 1025
State Department:
Foreign Relations of the United States, published :
1939, vol. IV (Far East, Near Bast, Africa), 165
1940, vol. IV (Far East), 517.
Geneva Conference of Heads of Government, July 18-
23, 1955, published, 686
Genera Meeting of Foreign Ministers, Oct. 21-Nov. 16,
1955, published, 916
Lists of recent releases, 38, 165, 203, 249, 290, 309,
518, 550, 590, 678, 770, 813, 862, 953, 1041
United Nations :
Lists of current documents, 207, 20S, 248, 366, 441, 514,
583, 676, 714
Publications and research policy, recommendations
(Kotschnig) for reexamination of, 322
Yearbook on Human Rights, 280
Puerto Rico, economic and social progress of women, 5S7,
588
Quenioy and Matsu Islands, Communist buildup of air-
fields near, statement (Dulles), 1009
Radar, distant early warning system :
Agreement with Canada, 22
U.S.-Canadian inspection of installations, 495
Radford, Adm. Arthur, 895
Radiation, atomic, effects on human health : See under
Atomic energy, peaceful uses
Radio broadcasting, Western proposals at Geneva Foreign
Ministers Meeting for exchange of radio broadcasts
with Soviet Union, and Soviet rejection, 776, 877, 8S0
Radio frequencies, registration, agreement with Iceland,
478
Randall, Harold M., 166
Reciprocity Information, Committee for, notice regarding
tariff negotiations, 508, 510, 579, 1021, 1023
Reconstruction and Development, International P.ank for.
See International Bank
Red Cross, American National, letter (Eisenhower), con-
cerning Geneva conventions (1949), 454
Red Cross, International Committee of, agreements con-
cerning administration of the International Tracing
Service, 289
Refugee Relief Act (1953), background, proposed amend-
ments, 562, 563, 564
Refugees and displaced persons :
Arab refugee problem :
Addresses (Dulles), 379, 526
U.S. aid, 33
Copyright convention, universal, protocol 1, application
of convention to works of stateless persons and
refugees :
Current actions, 163, 327, 441
Proclamation, text, 326
Status list, 328
Governors' committees for refugee relief, conference of,
225
Greek applications for U.S. visas, cutoff date announced,
917
ICEM. See Intergovernmental Committee for European
Migration
International Tracing Service, agreements concerning
administration, 289
Transportation of refugees to U.S., 99
U.N. program for relief, statements (Blaustein) and
resolutions, 628, 634w, 762, 811, S12n.
U.S. program for relief :
Address (Morton), 561
Public Advisory Group, appointment of member, 363
Reichelderfer, F. W., 435
Reid, Sen. Thomas, 985
Relief and rehabilitation. See Refugees and displaced
persons and individual countries
Relief supplies, agreement with Ecuador for duty-free
entry and defrayment of inland transportation
charges, 516
"Renunciation of force" principle, U.S. policy, addresses
and statements : Dulles, 221, 260, 261, 641, 690 ; Rob-
ertson, 693
Restitution, external, W. German agency established, 355
Reunion, conventions on seamen, 5S9
Rhodesia and Nyasaland, Federation of :
GATT, amending protocols, 932
ICEM, constitution of, 210
OTC, agreement on, 931
Rice, Cuban tariff quotas on, GATT, agreement with U.S.,
27
Rincon de Gautier, Mrs. Felisa, 5S8
Road service, establishment of, agreement with Bolivia,
442
Road traffic, convention on, 909
Robbins, Robert R., 282, 283, 287
Robertson, Walter S., 295, 690
Rockefeller, Nelson A., 616
Rogers, William P., 624
Romulo, Carlos P., 465, 916
Roosevelt Bridge, relocation of span for St. Lawrence
seaway project, agreement with Canada, 932, 978
Rountree, William M., 813
Rudolph, Walter M., 989
Rumania :
Assets in U.S., disposition of, S45
Maniu, Juliu, reported death of, 786
Photography, sketching, and execution of plastic works
of art, restrictions on, U.S. and Rumanian notes,
105
Soviet troops in, 339
Index, July fo December 1955
1117
Rumania — Continued
United Nations, admission to, 1068, 1070, 1071w
U.S. Minister, appointment, 369
Rural Electrification, Working Party on, U.S. delegate to
3d session, 907
Ryan, Robert J., 166
Rye imports :
Investigation of effect on domestic price-support pro-
gram, 28
Proclamation limiting, 117
Ryerson, Knowles A., 300
St. Croix River Basin, investigation of water resources, 21
St. Lawrence seaway, relocation of south span of Roose-
velt Bridge, agreement with Canada, 932, 978
Safety of life at sea, convention on, 249, 677
Salmon Fisheries Commission, International, report on
destructive effect of power projects on Fraser River,
984, 985
Salvage at sea, convention for unification of rules (1910),
442
Samoa, Western, administration as trust territory, 287
San Francisco meeting on 10th anniversary of U.N., state-
ment (Dulles) upon return, 50
Sanitation. See Health and sanitation
Santiago Negotiations on Fishery Conservation Problems,
documents published, 1025
Satellite nations:
Captive peoples in, sacrifices of, address (E. Dulles),
423
Eastern and Central Europe, question of restoration of
sovereignty, 172, 219, 525, 561, 562
Satellites, earth-circling, plans for launching for Inter-
national Geophysical Year, 218, 990
Saudi Arabia, Ambassador to U.S., credentials, 361
Scientific Unions, International Council of, U. S. delega-
tion to 7th General Assembly, 325
Scholarships, Foreign, Board of, appointments, 575
Seafarers, convention concerning medical examination of,
589, 1024
Seal of the United States, opening of exhibit in State De-
partment, remarks (Dulles), 94
Seamen :
Consular services to, article (Marx), 448, 450
Conventions on :
Certification of able seamen, 589
Employment at sea, minimum age, 589, 1024
Holidays with pay, 589
Shipowners' liability, 589
Sears, Mason, 159
SEATO. See Southeast Asia Treaty Organization
Secretariat, U.N., lists of documents, 248, 714
Security and Consular Affairs, Bureau of, State Depart-
ment, delegation of functions and authorities to ad-
ministrator of, 910
Security, national. See National defense and security.
Security Council, U.N. :
Documents, lists of, 209, 514, 676
Resolutions :
Admission of new members to U.N. See tinder United
Nations
Palestine question, 459
1118
Security Council, U.N. — Continued
Voting procedure :
Admission of new members, applicability, U.S. posi-
tion, 607, 1008, 1011, 1067, 1068, 1071
Soviet abuse of veto, 11, 1067
Selection Boards, Foreign Service, meeting and member-
ship, 125
Self-defense, right of, address (Phleger), 649
Self-determination :
Discussions in U.N. Commission on Human Rights, 11th
session, article (Lord), 280
Natural wealth and resources, right to permanent sover-
eignty over, U.S. position, SOS, 859, 892, 893
Principle of, in international relations, and U.S. posi-
tion, address and statement : Bell, 673 ; Murphy,
889
Problems facing Trusteeship Council, 159
Seton Hall University, address (Murphy), 1054
Shakespeare festival, permission for Soviet correspondent
to visit, 134
Shigemitsu, Mamoru, 263, 419, 420
Ships and shipping (see also Seamen) :
Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organization,
convention on, 478
Load line convention, international, 442
Merchant ship masters and officers, minimum require-
ment of professional capacity, convention on, 589
Naval vessels, U.S., agreements with —
Canada, for furnishing supplies and services to, 327
China, for loan of, 86
Ecuador, for furnishing supplies and services to, 249
Korea, for loan of, 550
Safety of life at sea, convention on, 249, 677
Soviet bloc attempts to acquire merchant fleet, 351
Soviet tanker Tuapse and crew, U.S. rejection of re-
sponsibility for, 302
Transportation of refugees to U.S., 99
Silver, Rabbi Abba Hillel, 895
Simmons, John F„ 91
Singapore, Communist subversion in, 694
Sketching, restrictions on, U.S. and Rumanian notes, 105
Slavery convention (1926), amending protocol and annex,
current actions, 327, 368, 442, 590, 769
Smith, Lt. Gen. Walter B., 706
Smith, Sen. Margaret Chase, 1065
Solar Energy, World Symposium on, 836
Solar energy activities, U.S., study by foreign scientists,
836
Somaliland, administration as trust territory, 285
South Africa, Union of :
GATT, declaration on continued application of schedules,
164
International Court of Justice, Statute of, declaration
recognizing compulsory jurisdiction, 769
Tariff concessions to U.S., GATT, renegotiation, 578
South America. See Latin America
South Asia. See Asia
South Pacific Commission, appointment of U.S. Commis-
sioners, 300
Southeast Asia. See Asia
Southeast Asia collective defense treaty, address (Dulles),
526
Department of Sfafe Bulletin
Southeast Asia Treaty Organization :
Cease-fire in Formosa, effect on, statement (Dulles), 261
Military planners meeting, message (Radford), 895
Southeastern Pacific fishery resources, meeting on con-
servation (U.S., Chile, Ecuador, Peru), 384, 513, 1025
South-West Africa, problem of self-determination, 891
Souvannavong, Curot R., 299, 916
Soviet-bloc countries :
Captive peoples, question of restoration of sovereignty,
172, 219, 561, 562, 833m.
Economic activities in free world, Battle Act report
(July-Dec. 1954), 342
Economic recovery, progress in, address (Kalijarvi),
1061
Geneva conventions (1949), reservations to, 70, 73, 74
Trade controls, U.S., relaxed on peaceful goods, 784
Trade with free world, statement (DeLany), 918
U.S. passport restrictions removed on certain countries,
777
Soviet Union (see also Communism) :
Agricultural delegations, exchange with U.S., 151, 689
American priest, U.S., protest against expulsion, U.S.
and Soviet notes, 102
Archbishop Boris, visa canceled by U.S., 102, 784, 888
Armed forces, proposed reduction, statement (Dulles),
338
Arms, surplus, question of disposal, 879
Arms shipments to Arab countries, statement (Dulles),
604
Atomic Energy, International Conference on Peaceful
Uses of, exhibit, 556
Atomic energy, proposed amendment to U.N. resolution
on technical conference, 803
Atomic energy agency proposal of U.S., U.S. reply to
Soviet note, 264
Atomic policy, 527, 528
Berlin, Soviet obligation to West regarding access to,
1010
China, Communist:
Representation in U.N., efforts for, 544
Support to, 492
Cultural exchange activities, 232
Disarmament. See Disarmament
Documentation required for nonofficial visitors to U.S.,
text of U.S. note, 104
East-West tensions, disinterest in relaxation of, state-
ment (Dulles), 1010
East-West trade. See under Trade
Economic activities in free world, Battle Act report
(July-Dec. 1954), 342
European security system, concept of, 53
Foreign policy prior to Geneva "summit" conference,
414, 415
Fur seals, North Pacific, international conference for
conservation of, 437
Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting. See Geneva Foreign
Ministers Meeting
Geneva Heads of Government Conference. See Geneva
Heads of Government Conference
Germany, Federal Republic of, negotiations concerning
diplomatic relations, release of prisoners, etc., 494
Soviet Union — Continued
Germany, position on reunification, IS, 46, 47, 51, 54, 916,
1005
Germany, Soviet obligations under 4-power agree-
ments :
Joint statement (U.S., U.K., France), and note to Mos-
cow following Soviet agreements of Sept. 20 with
East Germany, 559, 616
U.S. position, exchange of notes between U.S. and
Soviet Union, 734
Korean unification, position on, statement (Blaustein),
1079
Medical films, exchange with U.S., U.S. and Soviet notes,
785
Middle East, psychological gains in, 965
Military capability, 610, 611
"New look" policy, 639
Nuclear tests, 916, 964
Political philosophy, address (Khrushchev), 603, 611
Pravda correspondent, U.S. permission to attend
Shakespeare festival, 134
Propaganda in underdeveloped countries, 345, 346
Propaganda "peace" appeals, 81
Refugees, European, position on resettlement of, 632,
634w, 811
Rumania, Soviet troops in, 339
Southeast Asia, psychological gains in, 965
Subversion of free world, techniques, 600
Tanker Tuapse, U.S. rejection of responsibility for, 302
Trade policy, contrast with Western nations, state-
ment (Dulles), 777
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Austrian state treaty, 209
Berlin, Greater, protocol with U.S. defining boundary
of, 165
Germany, East, agreements of Sept. 20, 1955. U.S.,
U.K., and French position regarding Soviet obliga-
tions in Germany, 559, 616
Medical films, exchange with U.S., 932
Underdeveloped countries, policy toward, 1005, 1007
United Nations, inscription on General Assembly
agenda of Soviet item on relaxing international
tension, 583
United Nations, position on admission of new members,
statements (Lodge), 1067
U.N. influence on policies of, address (Wilcox), 900
U.N. specialized agencies, attitude toward, 902
Unreliability of promises, 964
U.S. aircraft, attacks on. See under Aviation
U.S. attitude toward, statement (Eisenhower), 172
U.S. citizens, release of, 354
Visa to Father Louis Dion for entry, 784
World domination, change of tactics for achievement of,
address (Murphy), 1056
Spain :
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Agricultural surpluses, agreement with U.S. amend-
ing 1955 agreement, 862
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 210
Facilities assistance program, agreement with U.S.
extending, 210
Geneva conventions (1949), reservation to, 75
Index, July to December 7955
1119
Spain — Continued
Treaties, agreements, etc. — Continued
Narcotic drugs, protocol amending certain interna-
tional agreements by transferring certain duties
and functions from League of Nations to U.N. and
WHO, 623
Narcotic drugs, protocol bringing imder international
control drugs outside scope of 1931 convention as
amended by 1946 protocol, 623
Postal convention, universal, extension to possessions,
210
Telecommunication convention, international, and
final and additional protocols, 677
United Nations, admission to, 1067, 1068, 1070, 1071m
U.S. defense support to, statement (Stassen), 31
Specialized agencies, U.N. (see also name of agency) :
Administrative problems, statement (Merrow), 715
Aid to underdeveloped countries, statement (Hays),
712
Coordination of programs, statement (Kotschnig), 317
Impact on, by Geneva Heads of Government Confer-
ence, 257
U.S. participation and Soviet attitude, addresses (Wil-
cox), 745, 902
"Spirit of Geneva" :
Addresses and statement concerning: Eisenhower, 376,
377, 728 ; Murphy, 414 ; Robertson, 691 ; Wadsworth,
530
Deterioration after Geneva Heads of Government Con-
ference, statements (Dulles), 688, S27, 1056
Developments after Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting,
addresses and statements (Dulles), 418, 524, 525,
867, 868, 870, 1007
Stassen, Harold E. :
Activities regarding disarmament cited (Wadsworth),
530, 531, 532, 533
Addresses and statement :
Disarmament, 703
Peace founded on international law, 416
Youth and the free world, 535
Deputy U.S. representative on U.N. Disarmament Com-
mission, 264, 440
Special assistant to President on disarmament, 432
State Department (see also Foreign Service) :
Agriculture Dept. personnel abroad, Executive order
concerning, 306
Appointments and designations, 3S, 125, 166, 290, 329,
369, 442, 478, 529, 549, 567w, 589. 678, 722, 768, 813,
910, 953
Assistant Secretary-Controller (Carpenter), designa-
tion, 442
Assistant Secretary for Policy Planning (Bowie), desig-
nation, 442
Assistant Secretary of State (Wilcox), confirmation, 249
Deputy Under Secretary for Economic Affairs (Wangh,
Prochnow) appointments, 442, 567», 678
Economic officers, meeting, 454
Educational exchange program, responsibilities under,
238
Educational exchange program, study of relationship to
ICA exchange program, 966
State Department — Continued
Foreign-aid functions, Executive order regarding al-
location of funds, 273
Foreign policy, role in formulating, address (Simmons),
92
Foreign Service examinations announced, 575
Functions and authorities, prescribed for certain posi-
tions, 909
ICA, establishment and functions, 124, 432, 767
Personnel security program, address (McLeod), 568
Publications. See Publications
Resignation (Key), 125
Seal of the United States, opening of exhibit, remarks
(Dulles), 94
Special Assistant to Secretary of State (Jackson), ap-
pointment, 529
Special Assistant to the Secretary of State (Macomber),
designation, 768
Wriston Committee program, report on progress of in-
tegration and recruitment, 1053
State treaty, Austria. See Austrian state treaty
Stateless persons, universal copyright convention, pro-
tocol 1, 441
Status of forces agreement (NAT) :
Basic issues, statement (Murphy), 178
Current actions, 328, 99S
Stevens, Eli, 369
Stevens, Francis B., 910
Strategic materials :
East- West trade controls, statement (Del/any), 918
Release of stockpile in event of enemy attack, 701
U.S. imports, chart, 304
Strauss, Lewis L., 300, 381, 555
Streetcars for Korea, U.S., 190
Strong, Curtis C, 300
Stuart, R. Douglas, 927
Stubbins, Hugh, 302
Student-exchange program. See Educational exchange
Students in U.S., Communist Chinese. See Geneva am-
bassadorial talks : Civilians
Sugar legislation, proposed revision of Sugar Act, state-
ment (Holland), 120
"Summit" conference, Geneva. See Geneva Heads of
Government Conference
Surinam, WHO Regulations regarding nomenclature of
diseases and causes of death, 5S9
Surplus agricultural commodities. See Agricultural sur-
pluses
Suydam, Henry, 494
Sweden :
Contributions to American culture, address (Warren),
222
Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission, report and
refutation of Communist charges, 1082
Tariff concessions to U.S., GATT, request for renegotia-
tion, 26
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Aircraft rights, international recognition of, 998
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55n
1120
Department of State Bulletin
Sweden — Continued
Treaties, agreements, etc. — Continued
GATT, declaration on continued application of sched-
ules, 164
Switzerland :
Atomic research reactor, agreement with U.S. relating
to sale and purchase of, 210
Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organization,
convention on, 478
Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission, report and
refutation of Communist charges, 10S2
Trade agreement, supplementary, with U.S., proclama-
tion of, 113
Syria :
Air transport agreement with U.S. (1947), 86
Genocide convention (1948), 368
Taiwan (Formosa), defense of, U.S. position, 526
Tariff policy, U.S. (see also Customs and Trade agree-
ments) :
Barley, expiration of quotas, 543
Bicycles, increased duty on, 399, 794, 929, 930, 976, 977
Clover seed, alsike, proclamation modifying quota, 116
Concessions, care in negotiating, 303
Cuba, possible adjustment in preferential rates, 509,
510, 1022, 1023
Edible tree nuts, hearing canceled, 276
Escape clause provisions, 795, 930, 977
Figs, dried, imports, 462
Filberts, shelled, import restrictions modified, 275
GATT. See Tariffs and trade, general agreement on
Japanese cotton textiles, question of import restrictions,
correspondence (Dulles, Smith), 1064
Oats, expiration of quotas, 543
Rye imports :
Investigation of effect on domestic price-support pro-
gram, 28
Proclamation limiting, 117
Tung oil quota, investigation to impose not requested,
792
Tariffs, customs. See Customs
Tariffs and trade, general agreement on :
Addresses and statement : Bonbright, 860 ; Thibodeaux,
110 ; Waugh, 305
Compensatory tariff concessions by U.S. to Belgium,
Canada, Luxembourg, Netherlands, 226, 228, 231
Concessions withheld by U.S., 397
Cuba, rice quotas, agreement with U.S., 27
Cuba, termination by U.S. of preferential tariff con-
cessions to, 226, 228, 230
Declaration on continued application of schedules, 164,
702, 769, 931
Italy, U.S. concessions to, 616
Japan :
Accession to, 305m, 397
Declaration on continued application of schedules, 702
Proces-verbal extending validity of 1953 declaration
regulating commercial relations between contract-
ing parties and Japan, 164
Protocol on terms of accession, 164, 226, 478, 702, 769,
932
Tariffs and trade, general agreement on — Continued
Japan — Continued
Reciprocal application between Japan and other con-
tracting parties, delays, 860, 977, 1017
Rectifications and modifications to annexes and texts
of schedules, 4th protocol, 702
OTC. See Organization for Trade Cooperation
Protocols amending, 164, 368, 702, 931
Rectification to French text, 932, 1024
Rectifications and modifications to annexes and texts
of schedules, 4th protocol, 164, 368, 702, 931
Renegotiation of tariff concessions between U.S. and
Italy, Peru, Turkey, and South Africa, 578
Requests for renegotiation of tariff concessions to U.S.
by: Austria, 114; Dominican Republic, 274; Fin-
land, 115 ; France, 114 ; India, 26 ; Netherlands, 26 ;
Nicaragua, 26 ; Pakistan, 26 ; Sweden, 26
10th session of contracting parties :
Agenda and U.S. delegation, 721
Review of, 1016
U.S. tariff negotiations with contracting parties, 306, 507,
579, 1020
Task forces for study of disarmament, 706
Taxation :
Double taxation, avoidance of. See Double taxation
Foreign business income, proposed legislation, 432, 597
Korea, taxation of U.S. businessmen, 618
U.S. expenditures for common defense, agreement with
Federal Republic of Germany for tax relief on, S62
Technical aid to foreign countries. See Economic and
technical aid
Technical assistance, U.N. See under United Nations
Technical cooperation program, U.S. See Economic and
technical aid
Technical information and patent rights, exchange of,
agreements signed with Greece, Netherlands, and
Norway, 84
Technical Property Committee, 85
Telecommunication convention, international, (1952), and
final and additional protocols, current actions, 164,
289, 368, 442, 516, 677, 909
Tello, Manuel, 791
Thailand :
Agricultural commodities, surplus, agreement with
U.S., 164
Communist threat of subversion, 694, 755
Educational exchange programs, financing agreement
with U.S. amending 1950 agreement, 164
Military assistance agreement with U.S., agreement on
disposition of equipment furnished under, 290
Tin concentrates, agreements with U.S. for sale and pur-
chase of, 590, 998
U.S. Ambassador, appointment, 998
Thayer, Robert H., 369
Thibodeaux, Ben H., 110
Thors, Thor, 916
Timber Committee, U.N., Economic Commission for
Europe, U.S. delegate to 13th session, 440
Tin concentrates, agreements with Thailand for sale and
purchase of, 590, 998
Index, July to December 1955
1121
Tittman, Harold H., Jr., 310
Tobacco and military dependents' housing, agreement with
U.K., 623
Togoland unification problem, statement (Sears), 159
Tourism. See Travel, international
Tracing Service, International, agreements concerning ad-
ministration, 289
Trade (see also Agricultural surpluses; Economic policy
and relations, U. S. ; Imports ; and Tariff policy, U.S.) :
Antitrust policies, relation to foreign trade and invest-
ment, address ( Kali jar vi), 538
East-West trade (see also Geneva Foreign Ministers
Meeting and Geneva Heads of Government Confer-
ence: East-West contacts) :
Battle Act report (July-Dec. 1954), 342
Control of, statements : DeLany, 918 ; Weeks, 784
Latin America, trade with, addresses: Beaulac, 337;
Holland, 596, 654, 959 ; Kalijarvi, 1061
Travel, international, importance to U.S. foreign trade,
address (Waters), 620
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Bills of lading, international convention for unifica-
tion of rules relating to, (1924), 441
Commercial samples and advertising material, inter-
national convention to facilitate importation, 406,
549, 677, 769, 813, 861
Friendship, commerce, and navigation, treaty with
Federal Republic of Germany, 249
Tariffs and trade, general agreement on. See Tariffs
and trade, general agreement on
Trade agreements. See Trade agreements
U.S. exports to Soviet bloc, controls relaxed, 784
U.S. foreign trade policy, addresses, article, and state-
ment : Aldrich, 793 ; Benson, 935 ; Thibodeaux, 110 ;
Waugh, 303
Trade Agreements, Interdepartmental Committee on, no-
tice regarding tariff negotiations, 507, 1020, 1022, 1023
Trade agreements, with —
Ecuador, termination by U.S. of 1938 agreement, 86,
140, 511, 516
Guatemala, termination of 1936 agreement, 577, 623, 695
Switzerland, supplementary agreement with U.S., text
of proclamation, 113
Philippines, agreement relating to traders and investors,
476, 47S
Philippines, revision of 1946 agreement :
Announcement of signing, summary of provisions and
statements (Langley, Eomulo), 463
Current actions, 478, 813
Text of agreement, proclamation, protocol, annexes,
and understanding, 466, 768
Trade Agreements Act, 305, 1021
Trade Agreements Extension Act, 25, 1021
Trade and Economic Affairs, Joint U.S.-Canadian Com-
mittee on:
Address (Stuart), 928
2d meeting, announcement, delegations, functions, and
text of joint communique, 274, 576
Trade Cooperation, Organization for. See Organization
for Trade Cooperation
Trade fairs, Soviet-bloc countries participation in, 346
Traders and investors, agreement with Philippines relat-
ing to, 476, 478
Transport insurance, proposal at 10th session of GATT,
1020
Transtrum, Orville H., 768
Travel, international (see also Visas) :
Encouragement of, address (Weeks), 106
Freedom of:
Statement (Eisenhower) at Geneva Heads of Gov-
ernment Conference, 175
Western and Soviet proposals at Geneva Foreign
Ministers Meeting, 776, 779, 780, 880, 882
Importance to U.S. foreign trade, address (Waters), 620
Private road vehicles, customs convention concerning
temporary importation of, 289, 931
Touring, convention concerning customs facilities for,
2S9, 516, 931
Treaties, agreements, etc., international (for specific
treaty, see country or suoject) :
Atomic energy, civil uses, bilateral agreements for co-
operation, 3S3, 598, 663
Current actions on, listed, 37, 85, 123, 163, 209, 249, 289,
327, 368, 406, 441, 478, 516, 549, 589, 623, 677, 702,
769, 813, 861, 909, 931, 998, 1024, 1086
Requirements for, under Agricultural Trade Develop-
ment and Assistance Act, 198
Troops, U.S. See Armed forces
Trust territories, U.N. :
Administration of Nauru, New Guinea, Somaliland, and
Western Samoa, U. S. views, 282
Pacific Islands, report on U.S. administration, state-
ments (Nucker), 153
U.N. action, 1954, report to Congress (Eisenhower), 393
Trusteeship Council, U.N. :
Documents, lists of, 248, 515
Problems of self-determination, statement (Sears), 159
Tuapse, Soviet tanker, U.S. rejection of responsibility, 302
Tuna industry, domestic, study of, 119
Tung oil import quota, investigation to impose not re-
quested, 792
Tunisia :
Cooperation with France, statement (Dulles), 301
Safety of life at sea convention, 249
Turkey :
Ambassador to U.S., credentials, 20
Cyprus question. See Cyprus question
Lausanne Peace Conference, effect on consolidation of
Republic, 497
Tariff concessions to U.S., GATT, renegotiation, 578
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Agricultural surpluses, agreement with U.S. modify-
ing 1954 agreement, 998
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55
Facilities assistance program, agreement with U.S.,
290
GATT, declaration on continued application of sched-
ules, 164
GATT, rectifications and modifications to annexes and
texts of schedules, 4th protocol, 164
Load line convention, international, 442
1122
Department of State Bulletin
Turkey — Continued
Treaties, agreements, etc. — Continued
Mutual defense assistance program, agreement with
U.S. relating to redistributable and excess equip-
ment and materials, 290
Off-shore procurement, agreement with U.S., 328
Salvage at sea, convention for unification of rules
(1910), 442
Status of forces agreement (NAT), agreement
amending understanding on implementation, 328
Telecommunication convention, international, 909
Trade Cooperation, Organization for, agreement on,
164
Tyranny, concerted efforts against, address (B. Dulles),
422
Underdeveloped countries :
Aid to, by international community, statement (Hays),
711
Economic development, progress under mutual security
program {see also Investment of private capital
abroad), 266, 269, 270, 271, 272
Soviet-bloc economic activities in, 342
U.N. action during 1954, 390, 391
U.S. policy in, addresses : Dulles, 1005 ; Holland, 139
UNESCO. See United Nations Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization.
UNICEF. See United Nations Children's Fund.
United Kingdom :
Berlin, quadripartite status, position, 1013m, 1014
Courts for armed forces in U.S., discontinuance, 361
Cyprus question. See Cyprus question
Disarmament, tripartite (with U.S. and France) draft
statement on, 882
Economic position, address (Kalijarvi), 1057, 1058, 1063
Egypt, Aswan Dam project, discussions on financial
support, 1050
Geneva Foreign Ministers Meeting. See Geneva For-
eign Ministers Meeting
Geneva Heads of Government Conference. See Geneva
Heads of Government Conference
German inland waterways control, British concession to
E. Germany, statement (Dulles), 1011
Near and Middle East :
Arms supply policy, joint statement with U.S., 560
Position regarding, 526
Prime Minister Eden, visit to U.S., statement (Dulles),
1009
Quadripartite talks with U.S., France, and Yugoslavia,
joint communique, 49
Soviet obligations in Germany, U.S., U.K., and French
joint statement and note to Moscow following
Soviet-East German agreements of Sept. 20, 559,
616
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Air service agreement with U.S., amended, 406
Aircraft, civil, agreement with U.S. for use of facilities
in the Bahamas long-range proving ground, 290
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreements with U.S., 38,
58, 290, S62
Atomic information, agreement between parties to
NAT for cooperation regarding, 813
United Kingdom — Continued
Treaties, agreements, etc. — Continued
Atomic information for mutual defense, agreement
with U.S. for exchange of, letters (Eisenhower,
Wilson) and text, 62, 63, 290
Austrian state treaty, 209
British property in Austria, understanding regarding
protection, 967, 1024
Commercial samples and advertising material, inter-
national convention to facilitate importation, 813,
861
Drugs, potent, protocol for termination of agreements
for unification of formulas, 623
Facilities assistance program, agreement with U.S.
extending, 210
GATT, declaration on continued application of sched-
ules, 164
GATT, protocols amending, 702
International Court of Justice statute, declaration
recognizing compulsory jurisdiction, 1024
Tobacco and military dependents' housing, agreement
with U.S., 623
U.S. Educational Commission, operational agreement,
38
Weather station at Betio Island, construction and op-
eration, agreement with U.S., 932
U.S. civilians in Communist China, good offices in re-
turn of, 456
U.S. Minister for Economic Affairs, appointment, 516
U.S. trade with, 794
Washington Old Hall, restoration, address (Aldrich),
651
United Nations :
Addresses :
Entering the Second Decade (Dulles), 523
Moral Foundation of U.N. (Dulles), 10
U.N. After 10 Years (Lodge, Wilcox), 736
U.N. After the Summit Meeting (Phillips), 255
U.S. participation in the U.N. (Wilcox), 899
Administrative progress and problems, statement (Mer-
row), 715
Admission of new members :
General Assembly resolution requesting Council con-
sideration for admission of 18 nations, 1069 (text),
1072, 1073
Security Council draft resolution to admit 18 nations
and proposed amendment to include Korea and
Viet-Nam, 1069, 1070 (text), 1070k
Security Council resolution to admit 16 nations,
omitting Japan and Outer Mongolia, statements
(Lodge) , voting in Council, and approval of General
Assembly, 1071, 1071n.
Security Council resolutions, proposed, to admit Japan
and Outer Mongolia at 11th session, 1071», 1072»,
1073
U.S. position, addresses and statements : Dulles, 607,
523 ; Lodge, 1067 ; Wilcox, 743
U.S. position on admission of Outer Mongolia, state-
ment (Dulles), 1008
Algerian question. See Algerian question
Annual report for 1954 to Congress (Eisenhower), 385
Index, July to December 1955
1123
United Nations — Continued
Atomic energy, actions concerning. See Atomic energy
Charter. See United Nations Charter
China, question of representation, address and state-
ments : Dulles, 1011 ; Lodge, 544 ; Wilcox, 744
Claims of nationals. See under Claims
Collective security system, 648, G49
Disarmament, efforts for. See Disarmament
Disputes, role in settlement of, addresses : Holland,
135, 136, 137, 140; Lodge, 697; Phillips, 258
General Assembly. See General Assembly
International Atomic Energy Agency. See Atomic En-
ergy Agency
International Bank for Reconstruction and Develop-
ment. See International Bank
Korea, actions regarding. See Korea
Publications. See under Publications
Refugee relief program, statements (Blaustein) and
resolutions, 628, 634», 762, 811, 812rc
Security Council. See Security Council
Specialized agencies. See Specialized agencies and
name of agency
Technical assistance in human rights field, article and
statements (Lord), and text of U.N. resolution,
279, 1034
Technical assistance program :
Address and statement : Hays, 804 ; Phillips, 257
General Assembly resolution, S05
U.S. contribution, statement (Hays), 712
Tenth anniversary :
Addresses : Dulles, 6 ; Eisenhower, 3
San Francisco meeting on 10th anniversary, evalua-
tion (Dulles), 50
U.S. Congress, resolution on renewed efforts for peace,
3, 4
World Health Organization :
Diseases and causes of death, nomenclature of regula-
tions, 589
Technical aid to underdeveloped countries, 712
United Nations Administrative Tribunal, review of judg-
ments by International Court of Justice, statements of
U.S. position regarding procedure (Merrow) and
text of General Assembly resolution, 93S
United Nations Charter :
League of Nations Covenant, contrast with, 739
Review :
General Assembly resolution, text, 949
U.S. position, addresses and statements : Bell, 948 ;
Dulles, 523 ; Wilcox, 484, 485, 744
Tenth anniversary, addresses : Dulles, 6 ; Eisenhower, 3
United Nations Children's Fund :
U.S. alternate representative on Executive Board, ap-
pointment, 316
U.S. contribution to, 513
United Nations Command (Korea) :
Personnel, detention and release by Communist China.
See Prisoners of war
Protests of Communist violations of armistice agree-
ment, 191, 396, 1076, 1078, 10S0, 1082, 1083, 1085
United Nations Commission for Unification and Rehabili-
tation of Korea, subcommittee, 1077
United Nations Commission on Human Rights :
11th session, article (Lord), 277
Recommendations on self-determination and permanent
sovereignty over natural wealth, 808», 859
United Nations Commission on Status of Women, actions
by 9th session, article (Hahn), 206
United Nations Conference on Peaceful Uses of Atomic
Energy. See Atomic energy, technical conferences
United Nations Congress on Prevention of Crime and
Treatment of Offenders :
Address (Rogers), 624
U.S. delegation, 243
United Nations Day, proclamation, 615
United Nations Disarmament Commission, U.S. deputy
representative, confirmation, 264
United Nations Economic and Social Council. See Eco-
nomic and Social Council
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe :
Electric Power, Committee on, U.S. delegate to 13th ses-
sion, 907
Timber Committee, U.S. delegate to 13th session, 440
United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America,
U.S. delegation to 6th session, 405
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Or-
ganization :
Constitution, 368
U.S. National Commission, 5th conference, 134
United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. See
Food and Agriculture Organization
United Nations Korean Reconstruction Agency :
Foreign Language Institute, 506
Report of Agent General, statement (Hays) and U.N.
draft resolution, 672
United Nations Trusteeship Council :
Documents, lists of, 248, 515
Problems of self-determination, statement (Sears), 159
United States citizens and nationals :
Citizenship, possible loss by "dual citizens," 658
Claims. See under Claims
Interment in Belgium, agreement with Belgium extend-
ing 1947 agreement, 368
Protection of:
Abroad, function of Foreign Service, 448, 450, 451
Berlin, U.S. protest against detention in Soviet sector
of U.S. Congressmen, 1012
Bulgarian destruction of Israeli aircraft, death of
U.S. citizens, U.S. protest and Bulgarian note of
regret, 264, 354
Communist China, detention and release of U.S. civil-
ians. See under Geneva ambassadorial talks
Prisoners of war. See Prisoners of War
Soviet Union, release of U.S. citizens, 354
United States Educational Commission, operational agree-
ment with U.K., 38
United States Information Agency :
Cultural centers, binational, administration of, 358
Program of, need for expansion, 1049
United States nationals. See United States citizens and
nationals
Uniting for Peace resolution, U.N., 649
Universal postal convention, 210
1124
Department of State Bulletin
Uranium resources, agreement with Brazil for cooperative
program for reconnaissance, 516
Urrutia-Holguin, Francisco, 916
Uruguay :
President of, visit to U.S., 338
Treaties, agreements, etc. :
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55ro
GATT, declaration on continued application of sched-
ules, 164
GATT, protocol of terms of accession of Japan, 164
Industrial productivity, agreement with U.S., 38
Organization of American States, charter, 589
Pacific settlement, American treaty on, 590
U.S.S.R. See Soviet Union
Vatican City, international telecommunication convention
(1952), 516
Venezuela :
Air transportation, international, convention for uni-
fication of rules, 549
Atomic energy, civil uses, agreement with U.S., 55m, 210
Economic outlook, address (Kalijarvi), 1061
Load line convention, international, 442
Venice Film Festival, question of entering Blackboard
Jungle, 537
Vessels. See Ships and shipping
Vested assets, return to Germany and Japan, proposed
U.S. legislation, 119, 971
Veto power in Security Council. See Security Council:
Voting procedure
Vice President, relationship to Cabinet during President's
illness, statement (Dulles), 608
Vienna Appeal, Communist propaganda campaign, SO, 81,
82
Vienna State Opera, reopening, statement (Dulles), 789
Viet-Nam :
Communism, resistance to, 755
Elections, U.S. position, address and statement : Dulles,
50 ; Robertson, 693
Hanoi, U.S. consulate closed, 10S6
Informational media guaranty program, agreement
with U.S., 998
President Diem, election, 760
U.N. membership, U.S. position and Soviet veto, 1068,
1069, 1070ji
Visas :
Archbishop Boris, issuance and cancellation of visa by
U.S., 102, 784, 888
Nonimmigrant, agreement with Australia concerning
reciprocal changes in immigration regulations, 590
U.S., issuance :
Consular function, article (Marx) , 451, 453
Nonimmigrant, changes in regulations, 10S
Nonofficial visitors to U.S., clarification of provisions
in note to Soviet Union, 104
Visual and auditory materials, agreement for interna-
tional circulation, 406
Wadsworth, James J., 530, 851, 1031
War claims. See Claims
War criminals, German, procedures for granting paroles
to, 887
War criminals, Japanese :
Paroles and reductions of sentences by U.S., 421
Release of, U.S.-Japanese joint statement concerning,
420
War victims, protection of. See Geneva conventions
Warren, Earl, 222
W T arren, George L., 308
Warren, Shields, 1031»
Washington Old Hall, England, restoration of, and Wash-
ington family history, 651
Watch movements, modification of U.S. tariff concessions
to Switzerland, 113
Waters, Somerset R., 620
Waugh, Samuel C, 303, 442, 626
Weather, World Meteorological Organization, convention
of the, 210
Weather station at Betio Island, construction and opera-
tion, agreement with U.K., 932
Weeks, Sinclair, 106, 784
Weimar Republic, comparison with Federal Republic of
Germany, 13, 14, 15, 16
West Africa, problems of self-government, 159
Western European Union :
Armaments control system, 417
German membership, 44
Wheat agreement, international, conference to consider
renewal or replacement, U.S. delegation, 767
Wheat agreements, with — ■
Libya, for grants, 328, 427
Yugoslavia, 124, 1086
Wheat Council, International, U.S. delegation to 18th
session, 767
White, Lincoln, 302, 786
WHO. See World Health Organization
Wilcox, Francis O., 249, 4S3, 736, 899
Wilkins, Fraser, 290
Willis, Frances E., 1051
Willkie, Philip H, 575
Wilson, Charles E., 59, 62
Wilson, Thomas B., 5SS
Women, convention on nationality of, 550
Women, Inter-American Commission of, 10th Assembly,
addresses, article, and messages ( Dulles, Eisenhower,
Lee, Rinc6n de Gautier), 5S4
Women, inter-American convention on granting of polit-
ical rights to, S13
Women, U.N. role in improving status of, article (Hahn),
206
Women in the Foreign Service, tribute to, address
(Heath), 1051
World Bank. See International Bank
World Health Organization :
Diseases and causes of death, nomenclature of regula-
tions, 5S9
Technical aid to underdeveloped countries, 712
World Meteorological Organization :
Convention, 210, 909
2d Congress, U.S. delegation and accomplishments, ar-
ticle (Reichelderfer), 435
Index, July to December 1955
1125
World Peace Council, history of, letters (Morton, Powell),
79
World Symposium on Solar Energy, meeting, 836
Wounded and sick, treatment in time of war. See Geneva
conventions
Wright, Adm. Jerauld, 699
Yost, Charles W., 249, 300
Young, Kenneth T., 843
Youth and the Free World, address (Stassen), 535
Yugoslavia :
Quadripartite talks with U.S., U.K., and France, joint
communique, 49
Yugoslavia — Continued
Treaties, agreements, etc.:
Agricultural commodities, agreements with U.S.,
124
Austrian state treaty, 1086
Facilities assistance, agreement with U.S., 770
Geneva conventions (1949), reservation to, 74
Military assistance property, agreement with U.S., 86
Postal convention, universal, 210
Wheat agreements with U.S., 124, 1086
U.S. defense support to, statement (Stassen), 31
U.S. Deputy Under Secretary of State Murphy, joint
communique following visit, 566
U.S. Secretary of State, visit, 733, 833
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Publication 6373
Released September 1956
U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1956
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Washington 25, D.C. - Price 25 cents
■■-■■''
M:
%€/ ^Deficwtmenl/ xw t/tat&
XXXIII, No. 836
July 4, 1955
TENTH ANNIVERSARY OF THE UNITED NATIONS
Address by the President 3
Address by Secretary Dulles 6
THE MORAL FOUNDATION OF THE UNITED
NATIONS • Address by Secretary Dulles 10
OURfNEW PARTNER— THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC
OF GERMANY • by Ambassador James B. Conant . . 12
HIGHLIGHTS OF THE MUTUAL SECURITY PRO-
GRAM FOR 1956 • Statement by Harold E. Stassen . 29
U.S. -CANADIANS AGREEMENT ON DISTANT EARLY
WARNING SYSTEM 22
For index see inside back cover
Boston Public Library
Superintend-"^ of Documents
AUG 1 1 1955
an
3fA
Q)e/ia*hne7it cf 5/Lte -DUllGtlll
Vol. X XXIII, No. 836 • Publication 5912
July 4, 1955
For sale by the Superintendent o( Documents
U.S. Government Printing Office
Washington 25, D.C.
Prick:
62 Issues, domestic $7.50, foreign $10.26
Single copy, 20 cents
The printing of this publication has
been approved by the Director of the
Bureau of the Budget (January 19, 1956).
Note: Contents of this publication are not
copyrighted and items contained herein may
be reprinted. Citation of the Department
or State Boilktin as the source will be
appreciated.
The Department of State BULLETIN,
a weekly publication issued by the
Public Services Division, provides the
public and interested agencies of
the Government with information on
developments in the field of foreign
relations and on the work of the De-
partment of State and the Foreign
Service. The BULLETIN includes
selected press releases on foreign pol-
icy, issued by the White House and
the Department, and statements and
addresses made by the President and
by the Secretary of State and other
officers of the Department, as well as
special articles on various phases of
international affairs and the func-
tions of the Department. Informa-
tion is included concerning treaties
and international agreements to
which the United States is or may
become a party and treaties of gen-
eral international interest.
Publications of the Department, as
well as legislative material in the field
of international relations, are listed
currently.
Tenth Anniversary of the United Nations
The Tenth Anniversary Meeting of the United
Nations was held at San Francisco, Calif., June
20-26. Following are the texts of an address by
President Eisenhower at the opening session on
June 20 and an address by Secretary Dulles on
June 24-
ADDRESS BY THE PRESIDENT
White House press release dated June 20
This, my second appearance before the United
Nations, gives me, as Chief Executive of the
United States, the great privilege of joining with
you in commemoration of an historic date — sig-
nificant, momentous, for all mankind.
I am privileged to bring you a special message
from the Congress of the United States. Last
week the Congress unanimously adopted a resolu-
tion requesting me to express to all of you here,
on behalf of the people of the United States, our
deep desire for peace and our hope that all nations
will join with us in a renewed effort for peace.
Later this week my close friend and associate,
Secretary John Foster Dulles, speaking with my
full confidence and concurrence, will address you
on appropriate elements in the foreign policy of
the United States. Because of this circumstance,
it seems fitting that I, today, speak principally in
terms of my country's unswerving loyalty to the
United Nations and of the reasons for our tireless
support of it.
A decade ago, in this city, the charter of the
United Nations was signed by its 50 founding
members. Into a world shattered and still at war,
but hopeful and eager for a new dawn, was born
an international organization fashioned to be the
supreme instrument of world peace.
For this Nation, I pay respectful tribute to you
whose faith and patience and courage and wisdom
have brought it through 10 tumultuous, frequently
discouraging, sometimes terrifying — but often
rewarding — years. That there have been failures
in attempts to solve international difficulties by the
principles of the charter, none can deny. That
there have been victories, only the willfully blind
can fail to see. But clear it is that without the
United Nations the failures would still have been
written as failures into history. And, certainly,
without this organization the victories could not
have been achieved ; instead, they might well have
been recorded as human disasters. These the
world has been spared.
So, with the birthday congratulations I bring, I
reaffirm to you the support of the Government of
the United States in the purposes and aims of the
United Nations and in the hopes that inspired its
founders.
Facing a Second Decade
Today — together — we face a second decade.
We face it with the accumulated experience of the
first 10 years, as well as with the awful knowledge
of nuclear weapons and the realization that a cer-
tain and enduring peace still eludes our persistent
search.
But the summer of 1955, like that one of 1945,
is another season of high hope for the world.
There again stirs in the hearts of men a renewed
devotion to the work for the elimination of war.
Each of us here is witness that never in 10 years
has the will of many nations seemed so resolved
to wage an honest and sustained campaign for a
just and lasting peace. True, none of us can pro-
duce incontestable evidence to support this feel-
ing. Nevertheless, all of us, I think, will testify
that the heartfelt longings of countless millions
for abundance and justice and peace seem to be
commanding everywhere a response from their
governments. These longings have strengthened
the weak, encouraged the doubtful, heartened the
tired, confirmed the believing. Almost it seems
that men, with souls restored, are, with faith and
July 4, 1955
courage, resuming the march toward the greatest
human goal.
Within a month there will be a four-power con-
ference of Heads of Government. Whether or not
we shall then reach the initial decisions that will
start dismantling the terrible apparatus of fear
and mistrust and weapons erected since the end
of World War II, I do not know. The basis for
success is simply put: it is that every individual
at that meeting be loyal to the spirit of the United
Nations and dedicated to the principles of its
charter.
I can solemnly pledge to you here — and to all
the men and women of the world who may hear
or read my words — that those who represent the
United States will strive to be thus loyal, thus
dedicated. For us of the United States, there is
no alternative, because our devotion to the United
Nations Charter is the outgrowth of a faith deeply
rooted in our cultural, political, spiritual tradi-
tions.
Principles of U.N. Charter
Woven into the charter is the belief of its
authors:
— that man — a physical, intellectual, and spirit-
ual being — has individual rights, divinely be-
stowed, limited only by the obligation to avoid
infringement upon the equal rights of others;
— that justice, decency, and liberty in an orderly
society are concepts which have raised men above
the beasts of the field : to deny any person the op-
portunity to live under their shelter is a crime
against all humanity.
Our Republic was born, grew, stands firm to-
day in a similar belief.
The charter assumes that every people has the
inherent right to the kind of government under
which it chooses to live and the right to select
in full freedom the individuals who conduct that
government.
Hence the charter declares :
— that on every nation in possession of foreign
territories, there rests the responsibility to assist
the peoples of those areas in the progressive de-
velopment of free political institutions so that ulti-
mately they can validly choose for themselves
their permanent political status.
Our long history as a Republic manifests a self-
imposed compulsion to practice these same prin-
ciples.
The charter recognizes that only those who en-
joy free access to historical and current facts and
information, and through objective education
Text of Concurrent Resolution
on Renewed Efforts for Peace '
Whereas it is the hope and prayer of the American
people that peace will be established among all the
nations of the world, thus avoiding the oarnage
and destruction of war, making possible the lifting
of the burden of arms and thereby freeing the ener-
gies of mankind to work more effectively to over-
come the ravages of hunger, disease, illiteracy, and
poverty : Therefore be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the
Senate concurring). That the Congress reaffirms
the deep desire of the people of the United States
for an honorable and lasting peace, and expresses
the hope that the people of all the nations of the
world join with the people of the United States in
a renewed effort for peace.
Sec. 2. The President is requested to convey an
expression of such reaffirmation and such hope to
the representatives of the nations gathered in San
Francisco to commemorate the tenth anniversary
of the founding of the United Nations.
1 H. Con. Res. 157, 84th Cong., 1st sess. ; adopted
by the House of Representatives on June 14 and by
the Senate on June 17.
learn to comprehend their meanings, can success-
fully maintain and operate a system of self-
government.
Our Republic, likewise, maintains that access to
knowledge and education is the right of all its
citizens — and of all mankind.
Written under the shadow of war, the charter
is strong in the conviction that no nation has a
right to employ force aggressively against any
other. To do so — or to threaten to do so — is to
defy every moral law that has guided man in his
long journey from darkness toward the light.
Those who wrote it clearly realized that global
war has come to pose for civilization a threat of
shattering destruction and a sodden existence by
the survivors in a dark and broken world.
Likewise, they recognized that the first responsi-
bility of every nation is to provide for its own
defense; and, in pursuance of this responsibility,
it has the clear right to associate itself with other
Department of Sfofe Bulletin
like-minded peoples for the promotion of their
common security.
But they who wrote the charter emphasized that
in the formation of such associations, within the
framework of the United Nations, it is incumbent
upon the contracting parties to inform the world
by solemn assurance, always supported by deeds,
that the sole purpose is defense, devoid of aggres-
sive aims.
Pledge of U.S. Support
We as a nati6n believe these truths that are ex-
pressed in the charter. We strive to live by them.
So:
We shall always maintain a government at home
that recognizes and constantly seeks to sustain for
the individual those rich economic, intellectual,
and spiritual opportunities to which his human
rights entitle him.
In our relations with all other nations, our atti-
tude will reflect full recognition of their sovereign
and equal status. We shall deal with common
problems in a spirit of partnership.
Insofar as our technical, material, and intel-
lectual capacities permit and wherever our aid —
including the peaceful use of atomic energy — may
be needed and desired, we shall continue to help
others achieve constantly rising economic levels.
Thereby, we trust that they will have increased
opportunity to attain their own cultural and
spiritual aspirations.
We shall work with all others — especially
through this great organization, the United Na-
tions — so that peaceful and reasonable negotia-
tions may replace the clash of the battlefield. In
this way we can in time make unnecessary the
vast armaments that — even when maintained only
for security — still terrify the world with their
devastating potentiality and tax unbearably the
creative energies of men.
As some success in disarmament is achieved, we
hope that each of the so-called great powers will
contribute to the United Nations, for promoting
the technical and economic progress of the less
productive areas, a portion of the resultant sav-
ings in military expenditures.
An abiding faith inspired the men and women
who devised the great charter under which you
work. We of the United States share that faith.
We hold fast to the hope that all nations in their
intercourse with others will observe those ameni-
ties of deportment, customs, and treatment of
other nationals as are sanctioned by tradition, by
logic, and by friendly purposes.
We and a majority of all nations, I believe, are
united in another hope: that every government
will abstain from itself attempting, or aiding
others to attempt, the coercion, infiltration, or de-
struction of other governments in order to gain
any political or material advantage or because of
differences in philosophies, religions, or ideologies.
We, with the rest of the world, know that a
nation's vision of peace cannot be attained through
any race in armaments. The munitions of peace
are justice, honesty, mutual understanding, and
respect for others.
Working for Peace
So believing and so motivated, the United States
will leave no stone unturned to work for peace.
We shall reject no method, however novel, that
holds out any hope, however faint, for a just and
lasting peace.
May I recall to you the words of a great citizen
of this country, Abraham Lincoln, which, though
uttered in a different context, apply to the prob-
lem which the world now seeks to solve. He said :
The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the
stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty,
and we must rise with the occasion. As our case is new,
so we must think anew and act anew. We must dis-
enthrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country.
In such a body as this, it seems fitting that we
should add to Lincoln's words : "Each for himself ,
our country and humanity."
The object of our second decade is still peace,
but a peace of such new kind that all the world
will think anew and act anew. It cannot be a
mere stilling of the guns — it must be a glorious
way of life. In that life the atom, dedicated once
as man's slayer, will become his most productive
servant. It will be a peace to inspire confidence
and faith so that all peoples will be released from
the fear of war. Scientists will be liberated to
work always for men, never against them. Who
can doubt that in the next 10 years world science
can so beat down the ravages of disease and the
pangs of poverty that humankind will experience
a new expansion of living standards and of cul-
tural and spiritual horizons. In this new kind
of peace the artist, teacher, and philosopher,
workman, farmer, producer, and scientist will
July 4, 1955
truly work together for the common welfare.
These hopes are not new. They are as old as
history. But now as we meet on this Tenth Anni-
versary in the city where was born the United
Nations, we must realize that at last they are
steadily and surely attainable. This is new.
Our part is to rededicate ourselves to the ideals
of the United Nations Charter. May we here
and now renew our determination to fulfill man's
ancient dream, the dream which so inspired the
founders of this organization!
Thus our duty will be nobly done, and future
generations will behold the United Nations and
stand up to call it blessed.
ADDRESS BY SECRETARY DULLES
Press release 383 dated June 24
Anniversaries can be both pleasant and useful
occasions. This meeting is of that kind. We look
backward and see much that was good. We look
forward and see much of promise.
The United Nations has already shown that it
is here to stay. One proof is the presence here
of 37 Foreign Ministers who have come from all
parts of the earth. Another proof is the fact that,
since its founding, no member nation has sought
to withdraw ; and there is a long — too long — wait-
ing list of qualified nations which want to become
members.
This esteem for the United Nations is based on
solid accomplishments.
In the political field there have been moments
of triumph, as when the United Nations enabled
Iran to bring about withdrawal of foreign troops
from its soil. And when it helped Greece to over-
come the threat of Communist subversion. And,
above all, when it saved the Republic of Korea by
organizing collective defense.
In the field of non-self-governing territories,
the United Nations, working through the Trustee-
ship Council and otherwise, improves the lot of
many dependent peoples and brings them nearer
the goal of self-government or independence.
Through its Declaration of Human Rights, the
United Nations holds aloft a standard which will
lead increasingly to respect for the individual
human being and his sacred God-given rights.
Through the Economic and Social Council,
much is being done to improve the economic and
social conditions of the less developed areas of
the world.
We live in the Atomic Age. And members of
the United Nations, responding to President
Eisenhower's stirring proposal, are joining to-
gether to create an international agency which
will harness for human welfare what was only
a weapon of war.
Above and beyond concrete actions is the all-
pervading moral influence which the United Na-
tions exerts. In fulfillment of the words of
Arthur H. Vandenberg — a name never to be for-
gotten here — our General Assembly has become
a "town meeting of the world," exercising a guid-
ing and enlightening influence on the conduct of
all nations.
These achievements explain why, throughout
the world, the United Nations is held in high re-
spect. As President Eisenhower said in his open-
ing greeting to you, the United States takes pride
in its loyal support of the United Nations in all
these manifold activities which benefit mankind.
Collective Effort To Preserve Freedom
The vision of the founders was indeed a lofty
one. They met, while war still raged, determined
to save mankind from the scourge of future war.
But the charter they wrote does not call for peace
at any price. The peace of the charter is a peace
of justice; it is a peace which will assure to all
nations great and small the right to be genuinely
independent; it is a peace which will enable all
individuals, however humble, to enjoy their God-
given right to freedom.
To attain these high goals, the charter calls
upon the nations to work together. Fellowship
is indeed the essence of the charter. No solitary
effort could win for any nation the charter's goals.
Collective effort is needed to preserve freedom.
Without collective strength despotism would have
free rein ; the rights of nations would be trampled
under foot, and human beings would be made
slaves.
The founders of the United Nations endowed
the charter with the flexibility needed to keep alive
this concept of collective effort that these unpre-
dictable times demand. A secure peace still eludes
us. But that spirit of collective effort implicit
in the charter, if practiced in good faith and with
creative will, can guide us toward the ultimate
goal of man — peace with freedom.
Department of State Bulletin
Collective Protection Against Aggression
We all know that certain of the activities of
the United Nations have been gravely hampered
by the use — abuse — of veto power in the Security
Council. This has prevented the Security Council
from discharging many of its intended functions.
Also, the Security Council has never brought into
being the security force which it was supposed
to command. The reason is that the members
have not sufficiently trusted each other to make it
practicable for them to unite their forces.
Happily, the framers of the charter realized the
limitations under which the Security Council
might operate. They did not require the members
to risk their future on a rigid, all-or-nothing
proposition. They provided alternatives. Ar-
ticle 51 permits like-minded nations with common
problems of defense to join together under the
charter for their collective protection against ag-
gression. This has been widely availed of by
nations which trusted each other and which felt
bound together by a sense of common destiny.
The first so to act were the 21 American Re-
publics. They had been closely associated for a
century and a half. They knew each other, and
they trusted each other. So in 1947 they made
their Rio Pact. It recognized that an armed at-
tack against any American state was an attack
against them all.
Others followed in that way. There was the
Brussels Pact of 1948, the North Atlantic Treaty
of 1949, and the Manila Pact of 1954. Now there
are the London and Paris Accords of 1954, which
bring about the beginning of Western European
Union, a union long dreamed of by men of vision
and good will but which, until now, has eluded
human grasp.
Every one of these collective security arrange-
ments embodies the basic principle of the United
Nations Charter, a principle which in turn de-
rives from the teachings of all the great religions,
that people have the right and the duty to help
each other.
Every one of these arrangements also gives
added security even to the nonparticipants.
There is less armament, because multiplication of
armament is avoided when the force that protects
one is equally at the service of many. Also, the
military power and facilities of a coalition tend to
become distributed and not within the control of
any single nation.
In international affairs, as in domestic affairs,
the sharing of power is the best safeguard against
abuse. Power which is shared among a group of
independent, sovereign nations cannot be used ef-
fectively unless the participating countries are in
accord. Such accord would be totally unattain-
able except for collective self-defense.
Because collective security responds to the needs
and highest aspirations of mankind, it has been
invoked by many nations. The United States,
which in 1914 and again in 1939 sought safety in
neutrality, has now learned by that hard experi-
ence that security lies in collective action. We
believe that the power which we possess ought to
be made available for the protection of others, just
as we desire the help of others for our own defense.
So the United States is today a party to mutual
security treaties which bind us collectively with
the defense of no less than 44 countries. We are
proud to have these multiple ties of trust and
confidence.
These systems conform to the charter of the
United Nations. They carry into effect the char-
ter ideal of fellowship. They operate under the
principles of the charter, and they are subject to
the influence of this organization. They have at-
tacked no nation; they have threatened no na-
tion; and they thwart no nation that does not
covet the land and peoples over which collective
security stands guard.
Collective Resolve To Back U.N.
Out of the evolutionary process I describe, much
good has come. Speakers who preceded me have
referred to encouraging international develop-
ments, particularly some of recent months. Wars
have been ended in Korea and Indochina; the
Austrian State Treaty has been signed ; relations
between the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia have
improved ; the Soviet Union seeks diplomatic and
trade relations with the German Federal Repub-
lic ; and peace talks have begun between the Soviet
Union and Japan.
These are indeed significant developments. But
in our rejoicing, let us not forget lohy they have
occurred or the sequence of events that have
brought us where we are. If we forget that, we
will have lost the key to a future of peace and
prosperity.
What has happened is because certain nations
backed steadfastly the principles of the United
July 4, J 955
Nations and backed them with a resolve that, if
need be, carried with it blood and treasure.
Today there is no longer fighting in Korea.
But wdry? The reason is that 16 members re-
sponded to the call of the United Nations and
fought the aggressor who had struck from the
Communist north and almost immediately over-
ran South Korea. After 3 years of bitter fight-
ing, the aggressors were back at, or behind, their
point of beginning. The aggression had failed.
Then, and only then, did the aggressor accept an
armistice and end the killing. It is indeed strange
to hear this triumph of collective security now
hailed as proof of the peaceloving character of
the aggressor and its supporters. If they had had
their way, we would today be commemorating the
fifth anniversary of the demise of the United
Nations.
Today there is an armistice in Indochina. It
was negotiated a year ago at Geneva. But shortly
prior to the Geneva meeting, several members of
the United Nations made clear that continuance
of the fighting would carry a threat to all of South-
east Asia and require consideration of collective
defense within the framework of the United
Nations Charter.
Today there is an Austrian treaty. It is a
treaty which could, and should, have been signed
years ago. For nearly a decade Austria was de-
prived of its freedom and its economy was ex-
ploited by one of the occupying powers. During
this period of travail Austria's courage was sus-
tained by the moral and material succor of
friendly powers and by the backing of its hopes
by the United Nations. In the long run, that
combination prevailed to win a victory for justice.
Today Yugoslavia is no longer the target of
abuse. An orchestrated threat began in 1948,
when Yugoslavia asserted its national independ-
ence and broke away from an alien yoke. During
the next 7 years Yugoslavia was helped militarily
and economically by nations which differed from
its Government in almost every respect except for
one, namely, the right of Yugoslavia to be a truly
independent, sovereign nation.
Today the Soviet Union seeks diplomatic and
economic relations with the German Federal Re-
public. That development comes after many
years of hostility, during which the Federal
Republic was given security and economic sup-
port by those who believe in the right of the
Germans to have an independent existence under
a government of their own choosing.
Today there is a possibility of peace between
the Soviet Union and Japan. Four years ago, in
this same room, 49 nations signed the Japanese
Peace Treaty, a treaty of reconciliation. I recall
how, from this very platform, that peace was
bitterly assailed and rejected by some. But now,
as a result of the treaty of San Francisco, Japan
has resumed a place of honor and dignity in the
community of nations, so that some nations now
seek peaceful relations which 4 years ago they
spurned.
Sustaining the Collective Effort
Throughout all of these events, there runs a
common theme, the theme of fellowship. Those
who believed in the principles of our charter have
helped each other, and in so doing they have
helped themselves.
Some say that what has happened marks the
beginning of an era. I believe that that can be.
Certainly the United States, I pledge you, will
do all that lies within its power to make it so.
But we do not forget, we dare not forget, that
some of those who now hail the recent develop-
ments are precisely those who sought for years to
stop them.
It is not unprecedented to see men make a virtue
of necessity. Today the necessity for virtue has
been created by a stalwart thwarting of efforts to
subvert our charter. If we want to see that virtue
continue, I suggest that it may be prudent to con-
tinue what has produced it.
Steadfastness to principle and sacrifice for
principle are the proven price of the good that we
have won. It would be reckless to expect further
good at any lesser price. To achieve peace with
justice, peace with sovereignty for nations great
and small, peace with respect for human beings
without regard to class, will require sustaining
the effort, the sacrifice, the solidarity which has
brought us where we are today. Much has been
accomplished, but more, much more, remains.
There exists the problem of German unification.
For 10 years part of Germany has been severed
from the rest. That unnatural division of a great
people constitutes a grave injustice. It is an evil
which cannot be indefinitely prolonged without
breeding more evil to plague the world.
8
Department of State Bulletin
In Eastern Europe are nations, many with a
long and proud record of national existence,
which are in servitude. They were liberated
from one despotism only to be subjected to another,
in violation of solemn international undertakings.
In Asia there is a Chinese Communist regime
which became an aggressor in Korea, for which it
stands condemned by the United Nations. It pro-
moted aggression in Indochina and has used force
and the threat of force to support its ambitions
in the Taiwan area. Recent developments, includ-
ing the influence of the Bandung conference, sug-
gest that the immediate threat of war may have
receded. Let us jtray that this is so. But the
situation in Asia remains one that cannot be re-
garded with equanimity.
Also, we cannot forget the existence of that ap-
paratus known as international communism. It
constitutes a worldwide conspiracy to bring into
power a form of government which never in any
country, at any time, was freely chosen by the
people and which destroys the reality of inde-
pendence. At Caracas last year the Organization
of American States found that the activities of
international communism constituted alien inter-
vention in the internal affairs of nations and were
a threat to international peace and security. This
threat should end.
Finally, there is the urgent problem of limiting
the crushing burden of armaments. For many
years the United States and its friends have
sought to find ways to carry out the mandate of
the charter to reduce the diversion for armaments
of the world's human and economic resources.
Nearly a decade ago the United States made a
proposal to internationalize atomic energy. This,
if accepted, would have prevented the present
competitive production of these weapons of awe-
some destructive power.
This unprecedented proposal was made at a
time when the United States was sole possessor of
this weapon. It was rejected.
This proposal was subsequently followed up by
new proposals for the control and regulation of
armaments and the establishment of an interna-
tional organ to supervise an honest disarmament
program. These proposals too were spurned. But
the Soviet Union recently indicated that it might
be prepared seriously to consider the initiative
which had been taken months before by other mem-
bers of the United Nations Disarmament Subcom-
mittee. Let us hope that these indications can be
translated into concrete action making possible
limitations of armament which are in fact de-
pendable and not a fraud.
Facing the Future
These are some of the problems that confront
us as we face the future. They are problems which
cannot be met if we shut our eyes to them, or if
we are weak, confused, or divided. They are
problems that can be met if we are faithful to the
principles of our charter, if we work collectively
to achieve their application, and if we are pre-
pared to labor and sacrifice for the future as we
have in the past.
The United States asks no nation to do what it
is not prepared to do itself. Any nation that
bases its actions and attitudes in international af-
fairs on the principles of the charter will receive
the wholehearted cooperation of the United States.
Admittedly the problems we face are not easy
to solve, and they will not be quickly solved. There
is room for many honest differences of opinion.
But the existence of hard, unsolved problems need
not itself be a source of danger and hostility if the
nations will bring to the common task the spirit
of our charter.
There is one extremely simple method of bring-
ing an end to what is called the "cold war" —
observe the charter of the United Nations ; refrain
from the use of force or the threat of force in in-
ternational relations and from the support and
direction of subversion against the institutions of
other countries.
To bring the cold war to an end, seven points
are not needed ; * this one is sufficient.
It is in that spirit that we go to Geneva, and
we hope to find that spirit shared. If so, we can
find there new procedures, or at least develop a
new impetus, which will help to solve some of
these vast and stubborn problems that still con-
front us.
We shall not, at Geneva, assume to act as a
world directorate with the right to determine the
destinies of others. Good solutions do not come
from such a mood. We shall seek to find pro-
cedures such that all nations directly concerned
can fully assert whatever rights and views they
have.
1 Mr. Dulles was referring to the seven proposals made
by Soviet Foreign Minister Molotov in an address before
the anniversary meeting on June 22.
July 4, 1955
In other words, we shall try to carry into the
Geneva conference the spirit which has been gen-
erated by this commemorative gathering of 60
nations. The sentiments which have been here
expressed can inspire new strength, new deter-
mination, and a new spirit of fidelity to the prin-
ciples of the United Nations founders.
In conclusion, I can do no better than to cite the
pledge made here last Monday by the President of
the United States :
"We, with the rest of the world, know that a
nation's vision of peace cannot be attained
through any race in armaments. The munitions
of peace are justice, honesty, mutual understand-
ing, and respect for others.
"So believing and so motivated, the United
States will leave no stone unturned to work for
peace. We shall reject no method, however novel,
that holds out any hope, however faint, for a just
and lasting peace."
The Moral Foundation of the United Nations
Address by Secretary Dulles ]
This "Festival of Faith" is held here today
because 10 years ago the United Nations was cre-
ated in this city. Also we are assembled here
because the religious people of the world con-
tributed largely to that great act of creation, and
they have ever since been steadfast in their sup-
port of the United Nations. Thus, it is particu-
larly appropriate that those of many faiths should
gather here to renew publicly their dedication to
the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
There are many who share credit for the great
accomplishment that the United Nations repre-
sents. But we can usefully recall that moral
concepts largely prompted the political decisions
that, 10 years ago, were recorded here.
When the Atlantic Charter was drawn up in
August 1941 to define the hopes for a better world,
it was decided to omit reference to the creation of
a world organization. It was judged that our
people did not want to repeat the League of
Nations experiment. That point of view was car-
ried forward into the United Nations Declaration
of January 1, 1942. The religious people then
came to see their responsibility and opportunity.
In this country they organized and campaigned
widely to develop a public opinion favorable to
world organization. The political leaders quickly
responded on a bipartisan basis.
1 Made at the "Festival of Faith" of the San Francisco
Council of Churches, San Francisco, Calif., on June 19
(press release 366).
I recall that history in order to remind our-
selves that under a representative system of gov-
ernment it is private persons and organizations
that must themselves make it possible to move
ahead to develop great new institutions.
Our religious people also exerted a profound
influence upon the form and character which the
world organization would take. As originally
projected at Dumbarton Oaks, the organization
was primarily a political device whereby the so-
called great powers were to rule the world. The
projected charter did not attempt to bind the
organization to standards of justice or of law, and
the General Assembly was cast for a subordinate
role. A Security Council, dominated by five na-
tions, each of which had veto power, was designed
to be the mainspring of the organization.
Religious Leadership
It was the religious people who took the lead
in seeking that the organization should be dedi-
cated not merely to a peaceful order but to a just
order. It was they who sought that reliance
should be placed upon moral forces which could
be reflected in the General Assembly, the Social
and Economic Council, and the Trusteeship Coun-
cil, rather than upon the power of a few militarily
strong nations operating in the Security Council
without commitment to any standards of law and
justice.
The great debates of the San Francisco confer-
10
Department of State Bulletin
ence of 1945 centered on these issues. In the end
the charter was written so as to require the organ-
ization to conform to principles of justice and
international law. Also, the powers of the Gen-
eral Assembly were enlarged so that the influence
of world opinion could be effectively brought to
bear upon the conduct of the nations.
As we can now see, looking back, these changes
were of profound significance. Indeed, without
them the United Nations might not have survived
these early, difficult years.
Weakness of Security Council
The Security Council has grievously disap-
pointed those who believed that the great powers
would act in concert to maintain world order. Not
once during the 10 years of its life has the U.N.
Security Council taken direct action under the
provisions of the charter. It could not do so be-
cause the U.N. contingents of land, sea, and air
power contemplated by the Charter have never
been brought into being. Whatever the Security
Council has done, as in the case of Korea, has been
in the form of a recommendation, a request, or a
plea — never a command. And even the scope of
its recommending has been gravely limited by
abuses of the so-called veto power. The political
vitality of the organization has been found prin-
cipally in the General Assembly and its right to
recommend, a right which carries great authority
because its recommendations reflect the judgment
of 60 nations, representing many races, creeds, and
areas.
Significant achievements have been recorded by
other organs of the United Nations which are not
dominated by the so-called great powers and where
no veto power exists. That is particularly true
of the Economic and Social Council and the
Trusteeship Council. By the Declaration of Hu-
man Rights the United Nations has raised a stand-
ard which will exert a profound influence
throughout the world for all future time.
So, as this past decade has unrolled, it has re-
vealed that the power of the organization was pri-
marily a moral power, derived from the judgment
of the participating nations and their peoples as
to what was right and what was wrong.
The successes of the United Nations have been
largely due to those throughout the world who
believe that there is a God, a Divine Creator of
us all; that He has prescribed moral principles
which undergird this world with an ultimate au-
thority equal to that of physical law ; that this
moral law is one which every man can know if
only he open his heart to what God has revealed ;
that these moral principles enjoin not merely love
and respect of the Creator but also love and re-
spect for fellow man, because each individual
embodies some element of the Divine; and that
moral principles should also govern the conduct
of the nations.
It is a most encouraging fact that all govern-
ments, even including those who deny the exist-
ence of moral law, feel it necessary to try to de-
fend their conduct, if it is challenged, in terms of
moral principles. This is particularly the case
when the challenge occurs, and when defense must
take place, within the General Assembly. This
is a testimonial to the power of moral law.
Thus, as we gather here as representatives of
many faiths held throughout the world, we can
find much ground for satisfaction. It has been
demonstrated that the religious people of the
world can generate the motive power required to
vitalize a world organization by providing it with
principles which are guiding not merely in theory
but in fact.
Challenge for the Future
We must, however, also recognize that, while
the history of the United Nations shows what the
religions people of the world can do, it equally dis-
closes that they do not always do it. Sometimes
they seem weak, so that moral principles do not
make themselves felt. Sometimes they are con-
fused and divided. Sometimes, also, they are in-
tolerant and impractical, demanding solutions
which do not take account of the fact that until
individual human beings in sufficient numbers are
themselves dedicated to high moral principles, the
moral solutions which may be devised by political
authorities have little effect.
To recognize these facts is to accept a challenge
for the future. The first 10 years of the United
Nations teaches a clear lesson. The lesson is that
the people of the world who are committed to the
moral law have a great responsibility to assure the
continued vitality of the United Nations and its
capacity to influence the course of international
conduct.
If the world organization were primarily oper-
ated by military power, those of us who are here
July 4, 1955
11
would have little to do. If it were primarily op-
erated by the self-interest of a few great powers,
those of us here would have little to do. Since,
however, the United Nations, as now constituted,
derives its authority primarily from the moral
forces generated by our respective faiths, then
those who participate in this "Festival of Faith"
have much to do. Indeed, we and our fellows
throughout the world carry a primary responsi-
bility.
A Prophet of one of the faiths represented here
said: "Not by might, nor by power, but by my
Spirit, saith the Lord of hosts." That sentiment is
common to all of our faiths. It can well guide us
as we look to a future which contains greater
hazard than any future men have ever faced, but
which also contains greater opportunity. That
opportunity can be grasped with confident hope if
men and women of faith throughout the world
develop and mobilize moral strength so that moral
standards will increasingly prevail in the United
Nations.
Our New Partner — The Federal Republic of Germany
by James B. Conant
Ambassador to the Federal Republic of Germany 1
A few weeks ago the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization, which is so important for the de-
fense of the free world, took in a new member, the
Federal Republic of Germany. At the same time,
the United States established formal diplomatic
relations with the Federal Republic by exchanging
accredited Ambassadors. Once again the historic
ties between the German people and the American
peojjle find their expression through conversa-
tions and negotiations between representatives of
two sovereign nations. But for the first time in
history we find ourselves allied with the Germans
on a military basis. The United States and
the Federal Republic of Germany are now both
members of an international organization of su-
preme importance and with a high degree of
power, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization,
an alliance created to defend Europe against
Soviet aggression.
For 10 years the relationship of our country to
Western Germany has been that of guardian to
ward. Last month the ward came of age. On
May 5 the Federal Republic of Germany, repre-
senting 50 million German people, became our
partner. 2 On May 9 it became a member of the
1 Address made before the Union League Club, Chicago,
111., on June 20 (press release 363 dated June 17).
" Bulletin of May 16, 1955, p. 791.
12
Atlantic family of nations, with equal rights and
duties. 3
This new association of partnership requires
that the United States and Germany become bet-
ter acquainted. Above all it requires that the
margin of error in our own judgment be reduced to
a minimum. Over the past 10 years much has been
done by both Germans and Americans to develop
better understanding between us. It has not
always been a simple task. Often our view was
obstructed by the ugly wreckage left behind by
National Socialism and the war. But now, 10
years after, I may say that most of the rubble has
been cleared away — both physically and spirit-
ually — and the road is open for what we hope
will be a long and satisfactory venture in coopera-
tion.
In the past month I have been aware of
heightened mutual curiosity, and on both sides a
certain concern is mixed with curiosity. Both
curiosity and concern are natural; it is well for
new partners to scrutinize each other.
Let me assure you that in Germany this exercise
is taking place in an atmosphere of friendliness
and frankness toward the United States. This
is not too surprising. One of my most positive
impressions formed in my 2y 2 years of experience
"Ibid., May 23, 1955, p. 831.
Department of Stale Bulletin
with the Federal Eepublic is that our relation-
ship with Germany, on balance, is good and is
sound. It does not exclude differences of opin-
ion — which is all to the good. A degree of differ-
ence is normal and desirable in any close relation-
ship, whether of nations or individuals.
As far as the Government of the Federal Re-
public is concerned, fundamental differences are
minimal — in fact, almost nonexistent. As for
the opposition, the majority of Germany's Social
Democrats today confine their criticism of us
largely to policy matters and do not extend it to
either the American people or the American way
of life. Many Social Democrats have visited the
United States in recent years and have returned
to Germany deeply impressed by our institutions
no less than by our hospitality. And I have in
my files countless letters from Germans who have
been discovering more and more points of similar-
ity between Germans and Americans.
Our View of the German People
But before I talk about the German view of us,
I want to talk about how many of us view the
Germans and Germany and try to answer some
of the questions that my countrymen have been
putting to me on this visit.
To begin with, I must remind you that as a
people we are no less addicted to forming stereo-
types of other people than they are of us. In re-
gard to Germany, some of us cling to a two-sided
cliche. On the negative side, some of us still
see Germans as reckless militarists — people who
love regimentation and are capable of great bru-
tality. At the same time, some of us are prone
to think of Germans as superhuman creatures
insofar as industriousness, efficiency, and vigor are
concerned. But this conception of the Germans
is a stereotype too. And the real flesh and blood
German of today has just about as much resem-
blance to either image as any real American has
to the preconceived notion that many Germans
and other Europeans have of him.
While the Federal Republic was moving toward
sovereignty, integration with the West, and re-
armament, Americans asked me repeatedly if we
could really trust the new Germany. Now that
the Federal Republic is a newly sovereign state,
people ask me how I can be sure that an inde-
pendent Germany won't reject a democratic gov-
ernment and succumb once more to a dictatorship.
They remind me of what happened to the Weimar
Republic. Let me say emphatically that the Fed-
eral Republic of today is a far cry from the Re-
public of Weimar days. I know whereof I speak,
for I have seen both.
Days of the Weimar Republic
In 1925, 7 years after the German surrender in
World War I, I spent several months in the Wei-
mar Republic. I was a young chemist then, and
I was keenly interested in everything I saw and
heard. I found a Germany that was suffering
from the aftermath of a fabulous postwar infla-
tion. Political assassinations and local uprisings
had become commonplace. It was hard to find
anyone who would acknowledge German respon-
sibility for that First World War, harder yet to
find anyone who did not rationalize German de-
feat as a "stab in the back" administered by
"traitors" at home. Many Germans with whom
I talked were indifferent, if not definitely hostile,
to the principles on which the Weimar Republic
was founded. I felt that the new governmental
structure, lacking the loyal support of the more
influential sections of the German population, was
in jeopardy.
The democratic elements in Germany were
struggling against heavy odds. Had these ele-
ments received encouragement and support from
the Western democracies, they might have pre-
vailed. But they did not receive help from the
West; and in Germany they were opposed by
powerful conservative and reactionary forces that
had never accepted the military defeat of World
War I and that stubbornly refused to break with
the imperialistic past. Almost from the begin-
ning, the official government of the Weimar Re-
public found itself competing for popular support
with an oppositionist shadow system made up of
antidemocratic elements that were determined to
achieve a nationalistic restoration at any cost.
That was the Germany of 1925. In 1930, when I
returned briefly, the shadow of Hitler was already
on the wall and the clays of the Weimar Republic
were numbered.
German Recovery
It so happened that it was approximately 7
years after the German surrender in World War
II when I returned to Germany as High Com-
Ju/y 4, 1955
13
missioner. That was in early 1953. The Ger-
many of the Federal Republic, then in its fourth
year of being and facing a national election, was
the antithesis of the Weimar Republic of the
twenties. It was brisk and prosperous, its people
healthy-looking, alert, and well-dressed. Vast
reconstruction projects were rapidly effacing the
ruins of the war-blasted cities. The recovery
from economic chaos had been nothing short of
miraculous. By 1953 the industrial index had
climbed to 158 percent of the 1936 index, 1936
being generally accepted as the last normal pre-
war year. Exports were increasing steadily.
Banks were sound and currency was stable. Since
the surrender of 1945 Western Germany had had
no uprisings, no organized revolts, no political
assassinations. The temper of the people was
utterly different from what it was in the twenties.
If there were people who denied the responsi-
bility of the Nazis for starting World War II,
their voices were not to be heard. But, above
all, the Germans are not now looking backward
through rose-colored glasses. They have rejected
the past and are facing the future.
Naturally I was deeply interested in the story
behind Germany's remarkable recovery, and I
soon discovered that it began with the currency
reform which took place June 20, 1948, by order
of the Allied Military Government. 1
If anyone ever needed evidence of the impor-
tance of a stable currency, the history of Germany
from 1945 until the summer of 1948 provides
ample material. During the first postwar years,
when there was no stable currency, very little
rebuilding took place and trade was at a stand-
still. Plans for starting up the industries again
were blocked by a depreciated currency. As soon
as a stable currency was introduced by the three
Occupying Powers in the Western Zones, West-
ern Germany began to flourish. It has continued
to do so. And the currency continues sound and
stable, safeguarded by a law that established a
central bank, largely independent of the Finance
Ministry, to supervise banking functions within
the Federal Republic. Under existing arrange-
ments in the Federal Republic of Germany, the
experts tell me it would be technically very diffi-
cult for any government to solve its social prob-
lems by inflation.
1 IUd., June 27, 1948, p. 835, and Aug. 1, 1948, p. 141.
Closely connected with the creation of a stable
currency and a sound banking system was the
introduction by the Government, which was
formed in late 1949, of an economic policy based
on private initiative and competition. The taxing
system was designed to enable industry to put back
into business its profits. The reconstruction of
German industry owes much to this system, for
the capital market in Germany is still inadequate
and long-term interest rates are very high.
Marshall Plan Aid
Of course, the impetus given by the Marshall
plan aid was of the greatest importance, as Ger-
mans in all walks of life acknowledge freely. All
told, the American taxpayer contributed some
$3.5 billion to the reconstruction of Germany.
Most of this was given in the form of foodstuffs
purchased in the United States, shipped to Ger-
many, and given to the Federal Republic, which
sold the goods and with the payment received
established what were called counterpart funds.
The counterpart funds thus created were loaned
to German industries to help them rebuild their
plants and expand their businesses. Marshall
plan aid to the Federal Republic ended 3 years
ago — though we continue some aid to the city of
Berlin because of its special problems.
The "miracle" of German recovery can be
summed up in a few words: currency reform by
the Occupation authorities ; establishment by law
of a stable banking system ; wise economic policies
developed by the Government, with emphasis on
private industry ; and Marshall plan aid from the
United States. To these factors should be added
two others: namely, the well-known ability of the
Germans to work hard and effectively, and the
attitude of German labor leaders, who during the
critical years refrained from pushing unreason-
able demands for higher wages. In combination,
all these factors have produced what can only be
described as the "amazing" economic recovery of
that part of Germany which is now the Federal
Republic.
The Adenauer Government
Had I had any doubts of the political sta-
bility of the new Germany, they vanished away
in the September elections of 1953. Some of
you may recall that Chancellor Konrad Adenauer
assumed office in 1949 by virtue of one vote and
14
Department of State Bulletin
with an extremely shaky majority for his coali-
tion in the Bundestag, or Lower House of Parlia-
ment. A skeptical Europe gave the Adenauer gov-
ernment 6 months, but that government survived
the G months and is now well on in its sixth year.
Indeed, its victory in the 1953 elections was the
kind described as a landslide. Adenauer emerged
with an absolute majority for his own Christian
Democratic Party and a two-thirds majority for
his coalition of moderately conservative and mod-
erately liberal parties. The German people had
demonstrated by their vote their support of a gov-
ernment based on democratic principles and
favoring European integration and German par-
ticipation in European defense. And they demon-
strated just as clearly their rejection of extremist
doctrines. In that election of 1953 neither Com-
munists nor extreme rightists were able to win a
single seat in the Bundestag. More recently, local
elections in various parts of Germany have con-
firmed this trend against radicalism of either right
or left.
Chancellor Adenauer has done what no chan-
cellor of the Weimar Republic was able to do. He
has managed to draw all parties into the new
state, disbarring only the unreconstructed elements
of left and right extremism. Under his leadership
Germany's conservative and liberal elements have
jointly created a democratic political system.
There is political opposition — as there is bound
to be in a democratic state — but in the Federal
Republic the opposition, with the exception of the
far-right and far-left splinter parties, is not hos-
tile to the state; in no sense is it antidemocratic.
Quite the contrary. The Social Democratic Party,
which constitutes the body of the opposition, takes
issue with the administration on economic prin-
ciples and matters of political strategy but never
on the validity of democratic principles. The
Social Democratic Party is and always has been
a stalwart champion of democratic processes, civil
rights, and international cooperation — and, what
is most important, it is militantly anti-Communist.
I believe that many of the difficulties of the old
Weimar Republic were at least partly due to the
worldwide economic crisis of the late twenties and
early thirties. With the help of the United States,
the new Germany has developed this present gov-
ernment against a background of increasing pros
perity and human well-being. I am sometimes
asked by Americans : Would the Germans have a
change of heart in the event of another great eco-
nomic depression? Personally I would not dare
to predict what might happen in any European
country if we were to experience again such a ter-
rible economic crisis. But let me repeat : the Ger-
many of today is not the Germany of the Weimar
Republic.
Combining Democracy and Military Strength
Other questions asked of me repeatedly in the
United States concern the future German army.
About half the questions express fear that German
rearmament may revive German militarism; the
Anniversary of June 17 Uprising
Statement by James B. Conant
Ambassador to the Federal Republic of Oermany '
On June 17 the world remembers with honor the
desperate courage of those who claimed their po-
litical and economic rights against armed force in
Communist-occupied Germany. The sorrow that
their demands were so ruthlessly suppressed will
always be illuminated by the light of their sur-
passing courage. Free men everywhere are
strengthened by the knowledge of their endurance
through many dark days of waiting for that demo-
cratic life they have so richly earned.
1 Made on the anniversary of the uprising of June
17, 1953, in the Soviet Zone of Germany (press
release 362 dated June 16). For background, see
Bulletin of July 6, 1953, p. 8.
other half express fear that the Germans might
not be willing to defend themselves at all !
(Superficially these two worries cancel each other
out. ) Regarding the first apprehension, the Ger-
man Government seems to be determined that the
new army shall be under strict civilian control by
the Administration and Parliament. This is the
stated view of the Chancellor and of the respon-
sible leaders in the Government coalition parties
as well as in the opposition. In recent months
numerous Government officials and parliamentary
deputies have visited various countries of the
Nato alliance, including the United States, to
study the constitutional and political safeguards
which the Western democracies have devised to
insure continuity of civilian controls over their
military establishments. The accounts of those
July 4, 1955
15
who have returned to Germany from these trips
have, convinced me that their visits have been
highly productive — and perhaps belong to the best
projects that the Government has ever sponsored
under the auspices of the Exchange Program.
The German officials and politicians have returned
from the United States profoundly impressed
with both the legal framework and the adminis-
tration of our defense system. They have de-
clared time and again that the principles em-
bodied in our defense system have universal sig-
nificance and, with appropriate adaptation, can
and should be applied in Germany.
The Germans are very much aware of their
problem. It was epitomized recently by the
leader of the latest group of visitors — incidentally,
Vice President of the Parliament and chairman
of a committee that corresponds to our Armed
Services Committee. He said: "We Germans
had a good army in the past. We hope to have a
good democracy. Our tragedy has been that we
have never been able to have both simultaneously.
You Americans have both. We are here to find
out how you work it."
This straightforward statement reveals the
great German dilemma : how to reconcile the in-
herent disorder of democracy with the order re-
quired for military strength.
During the time of the Weimar Republic, the
Reichswehr observed at best a posture of political
aloofness. It was a state within the state — an in-
strument of the generals, not of the government.
The new concept of a German army is that of a
defense force fully integrated with the democratic
state as its loyal defender against enemies from
within as well as from without.
I am quite aware of the reaction of some of my
fellow Americans who deplore the creation of a
national German army. I can assure them that
they will find themselves in the company of many
Germans, including men and women in the highest
positions. Less than a year ago the Chancellor
himself and his government were opposed to the
proposal of a German national army. They pre-
ferred a European army with a European general
staff and integrated German contingents. But
this idea collapsed on August 30, 1954, when the
European Defense Community failed to material-
ize — and through no fault of the German Govern-
ment or of the German people or, I might add,
of the United States Government either. Ever
since, the Federal Republic, in close cooperation
with the French, British, and American allies, has
endeavored to solve the common defense problem
in a way that would not sacrifice democratic free-
dom on the altar of security. The formula em-
bodied in the Paris Agreements, calling for the
establishment of a Western European Union
within the framework of the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization, was accepted as the best — at
least the next best — alternative to Edc.
Attitude of German Youth
Now what about the other side of the coin, the
reluctance of many Germans, especially of Ger-
man youth, to shoulder arms again? Well, this
attitude has both its positive and its negative
aspects. On the positive side, it is often said —
indeed by Germans themselves — that the attitude
is the direct result of Allied postwar policy to
demilitarize Germany and that in this respect we
have been singularly successful. However, honest
appraisals of the facts forbid me to take too much
credit for my Government. Allied policy may
have been a contributing factor, but anyone who
has seen the devastation of the early postwar Ger-
many, and then witnessed the Herculean efforts
of the German people to rebuild their country, will
understand the deep-seated desire of the German
people to live in peace — and to preserve the fruits
of their labors. These German people have no
desire to jeopardize their new prosperity by new
military and political adventure. Their pride of
achievement and their growing sense of economic
security, more than anything else, lend substance
and reality to the official declaration of their Gov-
ernment never to seek a solution to political and
territorial problems by resort to force. And that
declaration applies with equal validity to the ques-
tion of German reunification.
On the other hand, it is also being said that
preoccupation with material comfort and personal
advancement will make German youth an unwill-
ing comrade-in-arms. Predictions of this nature
originate most often with politicians and parties
known to be opposed to the policy of the Govern-
ment. I want neither to belittle the weight of the
argument nor to reflect on the honesty of all who
advance it, but I have no intention of letting this
argument get out of bounds.
German youth is not overly enthusiastic about
the prospect of military service. Well and good.
16
Department of Stale Bulletin
Neither is our own youth — or, for that matter,
the youth of any country that can offer its young
generation a chance to live decently and securely.
How real, then, is the thesis of those who say that
German youth would not volunteer for armed
service or, if drafted, would resist? In other
words, in what way and to what extent would the
behavior of German youth differ from that of the
youth of other nations ?
I think a number of surveys conducted by vari-
ous German polling institutes over the past 2
years give us a basis for a fair estimate of the
attitude of German youth. During 1953 one such
institute asked German youngsters whether they
would like to become soldiers. Twenty-eight per-
cent replied in the affirmative; 42 percent said
they were prepared to become soldiers under cer-
tain conditions — that is to say, for purposes of
defense, in the event of draft, if decent treatment
was guaranteed; and 28 percent answered that
they would not be willing under any circumstances
to join any army whatsoever.
Evidently the German soldier of 1955 or '56
will be different from his predecessors under
either Imperial Germany or National Socialism.
I cannot help feeling that he will resemble more
closely the GI's of the forties and the fifties. And
I am confident that, when it comes to the test, the
German youth will, by and large, follow the ex-
ample of their British, French, Benelux, Italian,
and American colleagues. They may not relish
the idea of military service, but when their num-
bers come up, they accept the necessity. I am sure
that young Germans will respond in this way. I
can scarcely imagine them wanting to leave the
task of protecting Germany to the youth of the
United States.
German Questions About American Policy
And now, I think you will be interested, in hear-
ing some of the searching questions that the Ger-
mans put to me about the United States.
I am often asked : Is there not danger that the
United States may some clay return to a policy of
isolationism and abandon Europe to its fate?
I ask, in return, just how unrealistic they think
we could be. In today's world, in which air power
devours space at an ever-increasing rate of speed,
a policy of isolationism for this country is un-
thinkable. Membership of the United States in
Nato, and indeed the whole postwar policy of the
United States, show that isolationism has ceased
July 4, 1955
349459—55 3
to be an influential force in American life. Our
actions have spoken and continue to speak louder
than words, but some of the words spoken have
produced action and continue to produce it. In
April of 1954 and again this spring, the President
has guaranteed that our troops will remain in
Europe. In his message of April 20, 1955, to the
Congress 5 he said :
The other free nations need the United States, and we
need them, if all are to be secure. Here is a clear case
of interwoven self-interest.
Rerjeatedly the President and the Secretary of
State have reaffirmed a basic tenet of our policy,
which is that we cannot be secure in our own free-
dom or in our own economic well-being unless, as
the President recently stated, "elsewhere in the
world, we help to build the conditions under which
freedom can flourish by destroying the conditions
under which totalitarianism grows."
It is a matter of public record that a tremendous
diplomatic, financial, and psychological effort has
gone into the buildup of the Western defense sys-
tem. The United States Government has contrib-
uted a mighty share. We have done so with a
high sense of urgency and with complete convic-
tion of the importance of the task before us. We
would hardly have supported and committed our-
selves to assist in the buildup of a system of for-
ward defense for Western Europe had we intended
to scrap it just when it has finally come to fruition.
As our Government has indicated time and again,
the existence of a coordinated defense effort by
the European powers is essential to the effective-
ness of the whole Nato defense system. It has
been the position of this Government that German
membership in Western European Union and
through Weu in Nato is a vital requirement of
the Atlantic defense and indeed of our own na-
tional defense. By the same token, America's ac-
tive participation in Nato is an indispensable
element in the planning of Western defense.
Until we can be satisfied that a revolutionary
change in world conditions has taken place and
that a state of global security exists which renders
obsolete the need for large-scale collective defense
on a regional basis, it would be the height of folly
to abandon the position of strength which we are
now about to achieve.
Another question I am often asked is whether
the United States will continue to protect Berlin.
6 Ibid., May 2, 1955, p. 711.
17
t remind them that our Government has com-
mitted itself to regarding any attack upon Berlin
as an attack upon the United States, and I assure
them that we shall remain in Berlin until that
city is the capital of a Germany reunited in peace
and freedom.
Any effort on the part of the Soviet authorities
or their German puppets to tamper with the pres-
ent status of Berlin or to harass the population
will find this Government solidly on the side of
the Berliners. The Soviet Government is well
aware that, until Berlin can attain its full and
legitimate status as the capital of a united Ger-
many, we will not tolerate any changes that would
interfere with the lifeline of the city or that
would arrest the city's gradual process of recovery.
Of course my German friends ask many ques-
tions about United States foreign economic and
trade policies. Despite the steady and very sub-
stantial progress registered by our Government in
the direction of an increasingly liberal foreign
economic policy, one or two deviations from this
overall course have been seized upon as evidence
that the United States has abandoned its liberal
policy.
The Unification Issue
I am sure that through such questions and
answers as we are exchanging with the Germans
we are achieving a better understanding of each
other. I have offered you just a sampling of the
questions asked me on each side of the Atlantic.
There is another field of questioning, grounded in
a profoundly human and personal problem, that
I have left to the end of this talk.
In German minds and hearts, this problem tends
to overshadow all others. Americans are uneasy
about certain possibilities of solution of this prob-
lem simply because they can appreciate so fully
what its solution means to the German people.
I refer to the fact that Germany is a divided
country, with 17 million Germans in Eastern Ger-
many cut off by the Iron Curtain from the 50
million Germans of the Federal Republic, and
with Germany's historic capital, Berlin, an island
in the Soviet Zone and divided as the country is
divided. Part of Berlin is under Western pro-
tection; the rest is under Communist control.
This unhappy division was the work of the
Soviet Union, which ever since has sought to make
reunification a bargaining point and a political
spider's web. It has consistently been United
States policy to help restore unity to Germany
by peaceful means. Britain and France have
joined our Government in periodic requests to the
Soviet Union to permit reunification of Germany
on the basis of free democratic elections. Just
as repeatedly, the Soviet Union has refused thus
far to allow reunification on a basis acceptable to
either the three Western nations or to divided
Germany itself. Thus far the Soviet Union has
offered Germany unification only on conditions
which, if accepted, would not merely isolate Ger-
many but would leave all of Germany at the mercy
of the Soviets. The offer has not appealed to
Germans in either east or west.
The Soviet Union has bitterly opposed integra-
tion of the Federal Eepublic with its Western
neighbors, its membership in Nato, and its close
ties with the United States. To the last moment,
the Soviet Union fought against ratification of the
Paris pacts — not only by the Federal Republic but
also by Britain and France. It alternated threats
and promises in its attempts to prevent German
ratification. If the Federal Republic ratified the
treaties, it could never hope for reunification, the
Soviets said, but, if it rejected the treaties, it
would be reunited with the Soviet Zone virtually
by day after tomorrow. Nevertheless, ratifica-
tion took place. The German Federal Republic
is sovereign ; it is joined with six other nations in
Western European Union ; and it is the 15th mem-
ber of Nato.
All along it has been the position of the United
States that, once the arrangements provided for
by the Paris pacts had become accomplished facts,
the Western nations would be in a better and
stronger position to negotiate with the Soviet
Union. With Western unity a reality, the
Soviet Union would be compelled to take West-
ern strength respectfully into account and to for-
mulate its own plans accordingly. The fact is that
shortly after the ratification of the Paris Agree-
ments, the Soviet Government ended its long-
standing obstruction of an Austrian state treaty.
The sequence is thought-provoking. It suggests
that our position was well taken. It suggests fur-
ther that the forthcoming "summit" meeting will
provide a strategic opportunity to probe the
nature and the scope of the Soviet Government's
recently developed symptoms of flexibility.
I am struck by the fact that the Germans are
viewing the problem of German reunification not
18
Department of State Bulletin
as an isolated problem that requires isolated treat-
ment but as part and parcel of a global problem.
Let me quote to you what the German Ambassador
to the United States, Dr. Krekeler, said in a recent
speech : "We know," Dr. Krekeler said, "that the
greatest hope for the reunification of Germany lies
within a worldwide settlement of the present ten-
sions between East and West."
He added a very significant statement: "We
also know," he said, "that we must not try for a
reunification of Germany at a price or under con-
ditions which would endanger our security." And
he concluded : "We cannot possibly agree, there-
fore, to any plans for a neutralization of
Germany."
Let me remind you that the Ambassador had
just returned from a very important conference
with Chancellor Adenauer. It is safe to assume,
therefore, that what he told the assembled Amer-
ican and foreign press was no more and no less
than the official position of the Government of
the Federal Republic.
To my mind, this has been the most conclusive
rebuff to Mr. Molotov's recent remark that the
formula found for Austria "shows clearly that
there are ways" of solving the German problem.
The Ambassador's statement also reflects what I
regard as the position on which the Adenauer gov-
ernment and the majority of all parties repre-
sented in the Bundestag seem agreed. I would
define the points of their agreement on the re-
unification issue as follows:
1. No military measures for reunification.
2. Reunification only under conditions that in-
sure freedom. This means that steps must be: (a)
changing of conditions in the Soviet Zone to al-
low a free election campaign and (b) free elec-
tions through all the former zones to choose rep-
resentatives to a new parliament which will create
a new all-German government.
3. The new entire-German government must be
completely free to decide its own future position
in Europe, including its own position at the peace
conference which will decide the boundaries of
Germany.
4. Any offer from the Russians that an all-Ger-
man government be formed by a combination of
the Pankow regime 6 and Bonn would be rejected
6 Pankow is the seat of government of the German Demo-
cratic Republic, the puppet regime sponsored by the Soviet
authorities and controlling the Soviet Zone of Germany.
out of hand; there must be no recognition of
Pankow.
5. Any discussion at this time of the future
boundaries of Germany is premature.
6. A neutralized Germany is out of the question.
Whatever the chances for reunification may be,
we can rest assured that the Federal Government
and the parties that support it have no intention
of bartering away the measure of security they
have now obtained for the doubtful promises of
the Kremlin. Neither their alliance with the West
nor their sovereignty, it seems, is negotiable.
U.S. -German Relations
It is good to know this, and it is also good to
know that Chancellor Adenauer and his colleagues
mean what they say. The relations between the
United States Government and the German Gov-
ernment have never been better than they are to-
day. That this is so is, at least in part, due to
the efforts of Mr. Adenauer. President Eisen-
hower expressed this very thought when he re-
cently restated his "utmost faith and confidence"
in the Chancellor. That is why we can leave the
decision regarding a visit to Moscow calmly with
him.
But, apart from £>ersonalities, it is particularly
gratifying to know that their policy is so close
to our own. The position of the United States
Government with respect to German unification
has been unambiguous and steadfast. We do not
now and we shall not in the future recognize a
status quo that is predicated on the willful, in-
humanitarian, and unnatural dismemberment of
a nation. We do not believe that an injustice
created by force and maintained by force will
generate anything but ill will, resistance, and a
permanent state of insecurity. We will therefore
continue our efforts to liquidate by peacef ul means
the current state of affairs and work jointly with
the Federal Republic and our other allies toward
the restoration of German unity in freedom. This
we will do not merely to right a major historical
wrong, not only for Germany's sake, but also from
motives of enlightened self-interest, to remove a
major source of the friction that is splitting Ger-
many, Europe, and indeed the world.
We do not believe, however, that this can
be accomplished through neutralization — and
July 4, 7955
19
neither does the German Government. It is
sometimes asserted that a reunified Germany
might defend itself alone with only it own troops.
But the idea that a country like Germany, which
has no natural boundaries at all (and which is
not a natural mountain fortress like Switzerland) ,
could defend itself alone outside a European de-
fense system simply ignores the new military
realities which have been created by nuclear weap-
ons and advancing aeronautics. Comparisons of
Germany with other countries that are strate-
gically less important and lack Germany's indus-
trial potential can only mislead. Germany is not
Sweden; she is not Austria; she is not Switzer-
land — from any angle you choose to view her,
military, political, or economic.
She is our new partner, and it would be hard
for two independent nations to see more eye-to-
eye on issues of foreign policy than do the United
States and the Federal Republic of Germany.
The thought is comforting in the face of the
great common tasks that lie ahead. It is par-
ticularly reassuring on the eve of the conference
"at the summit."
It is not for me to make predictions on the
agenda or the outcome of the conference. As
President Eisenhower and Secretary Dulles have
indicated so clearly, the conference is a beginning,
not an end. It will not and cannot bring the
answer to all problems — considering that some
have defied solution for years and some for gen-
erations. It will, we hope, open new "avenues
toward peace." If so, it will, we hope, bring into
the open the problems we know to be so des-
perately in need of solution.
That is what we hope for.
But we know that we will go to this conference
with a feeling of confidence and strength —
strength that flows from a new unity of purpose —
and unity that is devoted solely to the attainment
of a greater measure of peace and security for all.
Letters of Credence
Turkey
The newly appointed Ambassador of the Turk-
ish Republic, Haydar Gork, presented his creden-
tials to the President on June 21. For the text
of the Ambassador's remarks and the text of the
President's reply, see Department of State press
release 373.
20
Status of 21 Americans
Who Refused Repatriation
Press release 360 dated June 16
Following is the text of a joint statement of the
Departments of State, Defense, and Justice issued
at Emergency Press Headquarters, Operation
Alert, June 16, 1955.
In order to further clarify the status of the 21
former members of the American Armed Forces
who while prisoners of war in Korea refused repa-
triation, and who were given dishonorable dis-
charges and are now in civilian status, the Defense,
State, and Justice Departments today issued the
following statement:
1. The Military Departments will instruct
their field commands that if any of the 21 presents
himself to military authorities as an American
desiring return to the jurisdiction of the United
States, he will be turned over to the custody of
the nearest U.S. Consular representatives.
2. The State Department will instruct its Con-
sular representatives that immediately upon mak-
ing contact with any of these persons they would
inform him that in event of return to the United
States he, of course, would be subject to the laws
of the United States including the U.S. Code of
Military Justice for any wrongful act which he
may have committed.
3. Consistent with existing laws and regulations
the State Department will arrange for the return
of such persons to the continental United States.
Upon the return to the United States of any of
these individuals the appropriate federal author-
ity will determine whether further action will be
taken.
U.S.S.R. Agrees on Time and Place
for Four-Power Meeting
Following is a translation of the Soviet note of
June 13, delivered to the U.S. Embassy at Moscow,
in reply to the tripartite note of June 6 J propos-
ing that the four Heads of Government meet at
Geneva July 18-21.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Union
of Soviet Socialist Republics presents its com-
pliments to the Embassy of the United States of
1 Bulletin of June 20, 1955, p. 989.
Department of State Bulletin
America and in connection with the Embassy's
note of June 6 has the honor to state the following :
The Soviet Government, in its note of May 26
in reply to the note of the Government of the
United States of America of May 10, 2 has already
stated its positive attitude to convene a conference
of the Heads of Government of the United States
of America, the Soviet Union, Great Britain, and
France, having in mind that the objective of this
conference is to lessen international tension and
strengthen mutual trust in relations between states.
The Soviet Government agrees that the confer-
ence of the Heads of Government of the Four
Powers should open July 18 in Geneva. At the
same time, the Soviet Government cannot help
but note that the note of the Government of the
United States of America of June 6 displays con-
cern that the conference should last for 3 to 4 days
and also avoids the important question raised in
the note of the Soviet Government of May 26 con-
cerning the tasks of this conference. In the pres-
ent situation, the efforts of the Governments of all
Four Powers participating in the conference
should be directed first of all to guaranteeing the
fulfillment of the basic task of the conference —
reducing tension in international relations.
The Soviet Government notes with satisfaction
the information that the Government of Switzer-
land has expressed agreement to holding this con-
ference in Geneva.
Analogous notes are also being sent to the Gov-
ernments of Great Britain and France.
Joint Commission Asked To Investigate
Resources of St. Croix River Basin
Press release 349 dated June 13
As a result of a request received from the Gov-
ernment of Canada that arrangements be made to
have the International Joint Commission conduct
an investigation and report with regard to the
water resources of the St. Croix River Basin, the
United States joined with Canada in sending a
Reference on June 10 to the International Joint
Commission — United States and Canada, in ac-
cordance with the provisions of article IX of the
Boundary Waters Treaty of January 11, 1909 (36
Stat. 2448).
The Reference sent by the Department of State
to the Chairman of the United States Section of
the Commission reads as follows :
Department of State, Washington.
June 10, 1955
The International Joint Commission —
United States and Canada
Washington, D. C, and Ottawa, Canada.
Sirs :
In order to determine whether greater use than is now
being made of the waters of the St. Croix River Basin
would be feasible and advantageous, the Governments of
the United States of America and Canada have agreed
to refer the matter to the International Joint Commission
for investigation and report pursuant to Article IX of
the Treaty concerning Boundary Waters between the
United States and Canada, signed January 11, 1909.
Having regard to the legal, engineering and economic
aspects of the matter, it is desired that the Commission
shall, after making the necessary preliminary investiga-
tions, indicate whether, in its judgment, further develop-
ment of the water resources of the St. Croix River Basin
would be practicable and in the public interest from the
point of view of the two Governments and which projects
would seem to warrant further detailed study.
In making its report the Commission should indicate :
(a) what projects or regimens should be further con-
sidered to improve the use, conservation and regu-
lation of the waters of the Basin, taking into ac-
count the previous actions of the Commission as
well as the present and future interests of both
countries in the Basin ;
(b) how the interests on either side of the boundary
would be benefited or adversely affected by any
of the projects or regimens so indicated;
(c) the order of magnitude of costs of the indicated
projects or regimens, including indemnification for
damage to public and private property ;
(d) how the costs mentioned in (c) should be appor-
tioned.
In the conduct of its investigations and otherwise in
the performance of its duties under this Reference, the
Commission may utilize the services of engineers and
other specially qualified personnel of the technical agen-
cies of Canada and the United States and will, so far as
possible, make use of information and technical data
heretofore acquired or which may become available
during the course of the investigation.
Very truly yours,
John Foster Dulles
'Ibid., May 23, 1955, p. 832.
July 4, 1955
A Reference containing the same provisions was
forwarded on June 10 from the Canadian Depart-
ment of External Affairs to the Canadian Section
of the International Joint Commission.
21
U. S.-Canadian Agreement on Distant Early Warning System
Following are texts of notes exchanged on May 5
by the Canadian Embassy and the Department of
State.
TEXT OF CANADIAN NOTE
Washington, D. C.
May 5, 1955
No. 306
SlB,
I have the honour to refer to my Note No. 791
of November 16, 1954, 1 regarding the joint estab-
lishment by Canada and the United States of
America of a comprehensive warning and control
system against air attack. My Note read in part
as follows :
The Canadian Government has now considered a pro-
posal put forward through the Permanent Joint Board on
Defense that the construction of the Distant Early Warn-
ing element of the over-all joint Canada-United States
warning system should be the responsibility of the United
States Government. The Canadian Government concurs
in this proposal subject to the conclusion at an early date
of an agreement as to the terms which shall govern the
work. At the same time, however, the Canadian Gov-
ernment wishes to state its intention to participate in
the project, the nature and extent of such participation
to be determined in the near future.
I am instructed by my Government to inform
you that its participation during the construction
phase of the project will consist of giving assist-
ance to the United States authorities in organizing
and using Canadian resources, and to helping by
making available the facilities of the armed forces
and other agencies of the Canadian Government
when appropriate. I am also instructed to state
that the Canadian Government intends to parti-
cipate effectively in the operation and maintenance
1 Not printed. For a U.S.-Canadian statement of Nov.
19, see Bulletin of Nov. 29, 1954, p. 539.
phase of the project, the character of such partici-
pation to be determined on the basis of studies to
be carried out during the construction phase.
My Government now proposes that the annexed
conditions should govern the establishment by the
United States of a distant early warning system in
Canadian territory. If these conditions are ac-
ceptable to your Government, I suggest that this
Note and your reply should constitute an agree-
ment effective from the date of your reply.
Accept, Sir, the renewed assurances of my
highest consideration.
A. D. P. Heeney.
The Honourable John Foster Dulles,
Secretary of State of the United States,
Washington, D. G.
Annex
Statement op Conditions to Govern the Establishment
of a Distant Early Warning System in Canadian
Territory
(In this Statement of Conditions, unless the context
otherwise requires, "Canada" means the Government of
Canada ; "United States" means the Government of the
United States of America; "Distant Early Warning
(DEW) System" means all the detection stations, com-
munications installations (including relay stations), and
ancillary facilities, making up that part of the System in
Canada ; "RCAF" means the Royal Canadian Air Force,
and "USAF" means the United States Air Force.)
1. Sites
The location and size of all airstrips and the location
of all sites, roads, wharves and jetties, required for the
DEW System in Canada shall be a matter of mutual agree-
ment by the appropriate agencies of the two Governments.
Canada will acquire and retain title to all lands required
for the system. Canada grants and assures to the United
States, without charge, such rights of access, use, and
occupancy as may be required for the construction, equip-
ment and operation of the system.
2. Liaison Arrangements
It is anticipated that the United States will carry out
the construction of the DEW System through a manage-
22
Department of Stale Bulletin
ment contractor appointed by the United States. It is
understood that the United States and the management
contractor will establish a DEW Project Office, and that
the participation of interested Canadian Government
agencies in the Project Office is desired to the extent
necessary for consultation on matters covered in this
statement of conditions. In addition, the Canadian Gov-
ernment may decide to appoint a Special Commissioner
for the Project, and to assign liaison officers to the con-
struction operations in Northern Canada.
3. Plans
Plans of the buildings, airstrips, roads (including ac-
cess roads) and similar facilities, information concern-
ing use of local materials, such as rock fill, sand and
gravel, and information concerning other arrangements
related to construction and major items of equipment,
shall, if requested, be supplied to the appropriate Can-
adian authorities in sufficient detail to give an adequate
idea of the scope of the proposed construction. Canadian
officials shall have the right of inspection during con-
struction. Proposals for subsequent construction, or
major alterations, shall be discussed with the appro-
priate Canadian authorities.
4. Provision of Electronic Equipment
The Canadian Government reaffirms the principle that
electronic equipment at installations on Canadian terri-
tory should, as far as practicable, be manufactured in
Canada. The question of practicability must, in each case,
be a matter for consultation between the appropriate
Canadian and United States agencies to determine the
application of the principle. The factors to be taken into
account shall include availability at the time period re-
quired, cost and performance. For the purpose of apply-
ing these principles to the DEW line, the DEW Project
Office shall be used as far as possible as the instrument
for effective consultation between the Canadian and
United States agencies concerned.
5. Construction and Procurement (other than Electronic
Equipment)
(a) Canadian contractors will be extended equal con-
sideration with United States contractors in the
awarding of construction contracts, and Canadian
and United States contractors shall have equal
consideration in the procurement of materials,
equipment and supplies in either Canada or the
United States;
(b) Contractors awarded a contract for construction
in Canada will be required to give preference to
qualified Canadian labour for such construction.
The rates of pay and working conditions for this
labour will be set after consultation with the
Canadian Department of Labour in accordance
with the Canadian Fair Wages and Hours of
Labour Act.
6. Canadian Law
Nothing in this Agreement shall derogate from the
application of Canadian law in Canada, provided that, if
in unusual circumstances its application may lead to un-
reasonable delay or difficulty in construction or opera-
tion, the United States authorities concerned may re-
quest the assistance of Canadian authorities in seeking
appropriate alleviation. In order to facilitate the rapid
and efficient construction of the DEW System, Canadian
authorities will give sympathetic consideration to any
such request submitted by United States Government
authorities.
Particular attention is directed to the ordinances of
the Northwest Territories and Yukon Territory, including
those relating to the following:
(a) No game or wildlife shall be taken or molested
in the Northwest Territories. Licences to hunt in
Yukon Territory may be purchased from repre-
sentatives of the Yukon Territorial Government.
(b) No objects of archaeological interest or historic
significance in the Northwest Territories or Yukon
Territory will be disturbed or removed therefrom
without first obtaining the approval of the Ca-
nadian Department of Northern Affairs and Na-
tional Resources.
7. Operation and Manning
(a) The extent of Canadian participation in the initial
operation and manning of the DEW System shall
be a matter for later decision by Canada after
full consultation with the United States. It is
understood that, in any event, Canada reserves
the right, on reasonable notice, to take over the
operation and manning of any or all of the in-
stallations. Canada will ensure the effective op-
eration, in association with the United States, of
any installations it takes over.
(b) Subject to the foregoing, the United States is au-
thorized to station personnel at the sites, and to
operate the DEW System, in accordance with the
principles of command in effect from time to time
between the military authorities of the two coun-
tries. The overall manning policy as between the
employment of military and civilian personnel
shall be the subject of consultation and agreement
between the two Governments.
8. Financing
Unless otherwise provided by Canada, the costs of con-
struction and operation of the DEW System shall be the
responsibility of the United States, with the exception of
Canadian military personnel costs if Canada should man
any of the installations.
9. Period of Operation of the System
Canada and the United States agree that, subject to
the availability of funds, the DEW System shall be main-
tained in operation for a period of ten years or such
shorter period as shall be agreed by both countries in
the light of their mutual defence interests. Thereafter,
in the event that either Government concludes that any
or all of the installations are no longer required, and
the other Government does not agree, the question of
continuing need will be referred to the Permanent Joint
Board on Defence. In considering the question of need,
the Permanent Joint Board on Defence will take into
July 4, 1955
23
account the relationship of the DEW System to other
radar installations established in the mutual defence in-
terest of the two countries. Following consideration by
the Permanent Joint Board on Defence, as provided
above, either Government may decide that the installa-
tions in question shall be closed, in which case the ar-
rangements shown in paragraph 10 below regarding
ownership and disposition of the installations will apply.
10. Ownership of Removable Property
Ownership of all removable property brought into
Canada or purchased in Canada and placed on the sites,
including readily demountable structures, shall remain
in the United States. The United States shall have the
unrestricted right of removing or disposing of all such
property, PROVIDED that the removal or disposition
shall not impair the operation of any installation whose
discontinuance had not been determined in accordance
with the provisions of paragraph 9 above, and PROVIDED
further that removal or disposition takes place within
a reasonable time after the date on which the operation
of the installation has been discontinued. The disposal
of United States excess property in Canada shall be
carried out in accordance with the provisions of the
Exchange of Notes of April 11 and 18, 1951, 2 between the
Secretary of State for External Affairs and the United
States Ambassador in Ottawa, concerning the disposal
of excess property.
11. Telecommunications
The United States military authorities shall obtain
the approval of the Canadian Department of Transport,
through the Royal Canadian Air Force, for the establish-
ment and operation (including the assignment of fre-
quencies) of radio stations in Canadian territory. The
provision of telecommunications circuits (both radio and
land-line) required during the construction period and
thereafter will be the subject of consultation between
the appropriate authorities of the two governments, hav-
ing regard to the desirability of using existing military
circuits and existing Canadian public carriers where
this may be feasible.
12. Scientific Information
Any geological, topographical, hydrographical, geo-
physical, or other scientific data obtained in the course
of the construction or operation of the DEW System
shall be transmitted to the Canadian Government.
13. Matters Affecting Canadian Eskimos
The Eskimos of Canada are in a primitive state of
social development. It is important that these people
be not subjected unduly to disruption of their hunting
economy, exposure to diseases against which their im-
munity is often low, or other effects of the presence of
white men which might be injurious to them. It is
therefore necessary to have certain regulations to gov-
ern contact with and matters affecting Canadian Eskimos.
The following conditions are set forth for this purpose:
(a) Any matters affecting the Eskimos, including the
possibility of their employment in any area and
2 Treaties and Other International Acts Series 2298.
the terms and arrangements for their employ-
ment, if approved, will be subject to the con-
currence of the Department of Northern Affairs
and National Resources.
(b) All contact with Eskimos, other than those whose
employment on any aspect of the project is ap-
proved, is to be avoided except in cases of emer-
gency. If, in the opinion of the Department of
Northern Affairs and National Resources, more
specific provision in this connection is neces-
sary in any particular area, the Department may,
after consultation with the United States, pre-
scribe geographical limits surrounding a station
beyond which personnel associated with the proj-
ect, other than those locally engaged may not go
or may prohibit the entry of such personnel into
any defined area.
(c) Persons other than those locally engaged shall
not be given leave or facilities for travel in the
Canadian Arctic (other than in the course of
their duties in operation of the project) without
the approval of the Department of Northern Af-
fairs and National Resources, or the Royal Cana-
dian Mounted Police acting on its behalf.
(d) There shall be no local disposal in the north
of supplies or materials of any kind except with
the concurrence of the Department of Northern
Affairs and National Resources, or the Royal
Canadian Mounted Police acting on its behalf.
(e) Local disposal of waste shall be carried out in a
manner acceptable to the Department of North-
ern Affairs and National Resources, or the Royal
Canadian Mounted Police acting on its behalf.
(f ) In the event that any facilities required for the
system have to encroach on or disturb past or
present Eskimo settlements, burial places, hunt-
ing grounds, etc., the United States shall be re-
sponsible for the removal of the settlement, burial
ground, etc., to a location acceptable to the De-
partment of Northern Affairs and National
Resources.
14. Canadian Immigration and Customs Regulations
(a) Except as otherwise agreed, the direct entry of
United States personnel into the Northwest Ter-
ritories or Yukon Territory from outside Canada
shall be in accordance with Canadian customs
and immigration procedures which will be ad-
ministered by local Canadian officials designated
by Canada.
(b) Canada will take the necessary steps to facilitate
the admission into the territory of Canada of
such United States citizens as may be employed
on the construction or operation of the DEW
System, it being understood that the United
States will undertake to repatriate at its expense
any such persons if the contractors fail to do so.
15. Use of Air Strips
Air strips at installations in the DEW System shall
24
Department of State Bulletin
be used by the United States solely for the support of the
System. If it should be desired at any time by the United
States to use an air strip for other purposes, requests
should be forwarded through appropriate channels. The
air strips shall be available for use by the RCAP as re-
quired. The air strips shall also be available for use
by Canadian civil air carriers operating into or through
the area, whenever such use would not conflict with mili-
tary requirements, and SUBJECT to the understanding
that the United States Air Force will not be responsible
for the provision of accommodation, fuel, or servicing
facilities of any kind. Proposals and arrangements for
such use of USAP operated air strips by Canadian air
carriers shall be submitted to the RCAF, which shall
consult the USAP before granting any such permission.
16. Landing Facilities
Landing facilities at any of the stations on tidewater
will be available for use by Canadian Government ships
and ships employed on Canadian Government business.
17. Transportation
Canadian commercial carriers will to the fullest ex-
tent practicable be afforded the opportunity to participate
in movements of project materials, equipment and person-
nel within Canada. The United States will select the
means of transportation and specific carriers for the
movement of materiel, equipment, and personnel from
points outside of Canada to DEW System sites, provided
that in the case of air carriers applicable civil air trans-
port agreements and procedures shall be observed.
IS. Resupphj Arrangements
Because of the special conditions in the Canadian
Arctic, the Canadian Government has a particular in-
terest in the arrangements for the resupply of the DEW
System. These arrangements shall therefore be a matter
for later consultation and agreement between the two
Governments.
19. Taxes
The Canadian Government will grant remission of
customs duties and excise taxes on goods imported and of
federal sales and excise taxes on goods purchased in
Canada which are or are to become the property of the
United States Government and are to be used in the
construction and/or operation of the DEW System, as
well as refunds by way of drawback of the customs duty
paid on goods imported by Canadian manufacturers and
used in the manufacture or production of goods purchased
by or on behalf of the United States Government and to
become the property of the United States Government for
the construction of the system.
20. Status of forces
The "Agreement between the Parties to the North
Atlantic Treaty regarding the Status of their Forces",
signed in London on June 19, 1951, 3 shall apply.
21. Supplementary Arrangements and Administrative
Agreements
Supplementary arrangements or administrative agree-
ments between authorized agencies of the two Govern-
ments may be made from time to time for the purpose of
carrying out the intent of this agreement.
TEXT OF U. S. REPLY
Excellency :
May 5, 1955
I have the honor to acknowledge your Note No.
306 of May 5, 1955. You refer to the construction
by the United States of the Distant Early Warn-
ing element of a comprehensive warning and
control system, being established jointly by the
United States and Canada, and annex a statement
of conditions to govern the establishment of this
line in Canadian territory which were developed
in discussion between representatives of the two
Governments.
The United States Government notes the inten-
tions of your Government with regard to partici-
pation in the construction, operation and mainte-
nance of the project and both concurs in the condi-
tions annexed to your Note and confirms that
your Note and this reply shall constitute an agree-
ment of our two Governments effective today.
Accept, Excellency, the renewed assurances of
my highest consideration.
For the Secretary of State :
Robert Murphy
His Excellency
A. D. P. Heeney
Ambassador of Canada
Enactment of Trade Agreements
Extension Act of 1955
Statement by the President^
Enactment of the Trade Agreements Extension
Act of 1955 is an important milestone in the de-
velopment of our country's foreign economic pol-
icy. Supplemented by early approval of United
States membership and participation in the pro-
3 Treaties and Other International Acts Series 2846.
July 4, J 955
1 Made on June 21 on the occasion of the signing of the
Trade Agreements Extension Act of 1955 (White House
press release).
25
posed Organization for Trade Cooperation, 2 the
act can contribute significantly to economic growth
and economic well-being throughout the free
world. In this way it will materially strengthen
the defense capabilities of our friends abroad and
advance the mutual security of us all.
I am particularly gratified that this measure
was supported by overwhelming majorities in both
political parties. This bipartisanship demon-
strates anew our unity in dealing with matters
affecting our relations with other countries.
Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions
Requested by Five Nations
Press release 389 dated June 24
Five nations — India, the Netherlands, Nicara-
gua, Pakistan, and Sweden — have requested re-
negotiations, under article XXVIII of the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, of cer-
tain tariff concessions granted to the. United
States.
At their ninth session, the Contracting Parties
to the Gatt took action to extend the firm life of
the tariff concessions from July 2, 1955, to De-
cember 31, 1957. Prior to such extension, a
country may renegotiate its individual tariff
concessions with a view to their modification or
withdrawal. Such renegotiations, if notified by
June 30, 1955, may continue through September
30, 1955. Under this procedure, these five nations
have indicated that they wish to renegotiate cer-
tain of their tariff concessions of interest to the
United States. (As announced on June 10, 1955, 3
Cuba has also given notice of intention to re-
negotiate certain of its concessions.)
Under article XXVIII, a country wishing to
withdraw or modify a concession first must try
to reach some basis of agreement with other inter-
ested Contracting Parties concerning such with-
drawal or modification. The usual basis for
agreement would be the granting of new conces-
sions as compensation for the withdrawn con-
cession.
Interested persons are invited to submit their
views with regard to the possible effect on U.S.
2 For text of proposed OTC agreement, see Bulletin of
Apr. 4, 1955, p. 579 ; for a message from the President to
the Congress, see ibid., Apr. 25, 1955, p. 678.
3 Bulletin of June 27, 1955, p. 1057.
trade of possible modifications or withdrawals of
the concessions on the items in the attached list.
In addition, views are also desired regarding im-
ports into the above-mentioned countries from the
United States on which the United States might
request new or further tariff reductions as com-
pensation to the United States for any modifica-
tions or withdrawals of concessions on items in
the attached list.
Views on the foregoing matters should be sub-
mitted to the Committee for Reciprocity Informa-
tion, which is the interdepartmental committee
established to receive views on trade-agreement
matters. It is requested that any such views be
submitted by the close of business on July 15, 1955.
All communications on these matters, in 15
copies, should be addressed to The Secretary of
the Committee for Reciprocity Information,
Tariff Commission Building, Washington 25, D.C.
If any interested party considers that his views
cannot be adequately expressed to the committee
in a written brief, he should make this known
to the secretary of the committee, who will
then arrange for oral presentation before the
committee.
Items on Which Concessions to the United States
May Be Modified or Withdrawn Under Article XXVIII
of the GATT
India
Fast color salts, rapid fast colors, rapidogens,
rapidozols, solubilized vat dyes, vat dyes-
paste, vats indigo, vats carbazol blue
Naphthol, fast color bases
Sulphur black, acid azo dyes, direct azo dyes
Vats, powder
The Netherlands
Oranges and mandarins
Nicaragua
Flavoring preparations for nonalcoholic bever-
ages, unsweetened
Fabrics of pure artificial silk or of artificial silk
with less than 20 percent of cotton threads
(with the exception of plush velvet, corduroy,
or triple-looped cloth) which weighs more
than 50 grams per square meter
Unexposed sensitized photographic film
Transmitting and receiving tubes for radio
Table radios of 6 tubes or less
26
Department of State Bulletin
Typewriters and parts
Adding machines, comptographs and other com-
puting apparatus, and separate parts and ac-
cessories including ribbons, n.e.s.
Condensed and evaporated milk or cream
Dried whole and skimmed milk or cream
Boards of marble
Sheet glass
Cotton tulles and net fabrics
Plywood
Whiskey
Newsprint
Sewing machines
Pakistan
Canned vegetables other than tomatoes, potatoes,
onions, and cauliflowers
Paints, solutions, and compositions containing
dangerous petroleum
Fountain pens complete
Safety razor blades
Typewriter ribbons
Juices, individually or mixed, of apricots, berries,
grapes, pineapple, plums, and prunes
Canned pineapples
Unmanufactured tobacco
Sweden
Fresh apples
Fresh pears
Cuban Government Makes Payment
of Adjudicated Claims
Press release 390 dated June 25
The Cuban Ambassador, Dr. Miguel Angel
Campa, delivered to Acting Secretary of State
Herbert Hoover, Jr., on June 25, bond certificates
and a dollar draft of a total value of $885,696.44.
This is in payment of six outstanding claims of
American companies which have been adjudicated
by the Cuban courts.
These claims have been the subject of diplomatic
negotiations between the Cuban and U.S. Govern-
ments for several years, and their final settlement
is a source of satisfaction to both Governments
and to the American claimants. The bond cer-
tificates will be exchanged by the claimants in
Havana for 30-year negotiable dollar bonds bear-
ing 4 percent interest.
U.S.-Cuban Agreement on
Rice Tariff Quotas
Press release 348 dated June 13
The Governments of Cuba and the United
States have agreed upon new procedures for the
administration of the rice tariff quota provisions
contained in the note under tariff item No. 253-B
in Part II of the Cuban Schedule IX of the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.
The new procedures are set forth in an exchange
of notes signed on June 13, 1955, by the Cuban
Minister of State, Carlos Saladrigas, and by the
U.S. Charge d'Affaires ad interim, Carlos Hall.
This exchange of notes will supersede the ex-
change of notes of December 17, 1952, between the
U.S. Ambassador and the Cuban Minister of
State.
Text of U.S. Note
Habana, June 13, 1955
Excellency : I have the honor to refer to your
Excellency's note of June 13, 1955, which, in Eng-
lish translation, reads as follows:
I have the honor to refer to the negotiations just held in
Habana relative to the exchange of notes made between
my Government and that of Your Excellency on Decem-
ber 17, 1952, which regulated the application of the note
to Item 253-B in Part II of Schedule IX annexed to the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.
My Government understands that in the negotiations
mentioned in the preceding paragraph the following
agreement was reached :
1. The Agreement contained in the exchange of notes
between the Government of Cuba and the Government
of the United States of America on December 17, 1952,
will expire as of June 30, 1955.
2. Nevertheless, the text of the note to Item 253-B of
Part II, Schedule IX annexed to the General Agree-
ment on Tariffs and Trade, will remain in force in its
present form. Consequently, the basic tariff quota of
3,250,000 quintals set forth in said note will continue
to become effective as of the first day of each quota
year, that is, from July first, the imports of rice made
against said basic tariff quota to be governed by the
official internal regulations in force in Cuba.
3. Likewise, in case the rice import requirements of
Cuba during any quota year should be greater than the
3,250,000 quintals before mentioned, the Government of
the Republic of Cuba will announce, no later than
February 15 of the quota year concerned, the amount
of the additional quantity of rice needed, which rice
shall be imported into Cuba as a deficit tariff quota.
Said deficit tariff quota shall become effective not later
than the first of April of the quota year concerned, and
July 4, 1955
27
the imports of rice made against said tariff quota shall
be governed by the official internal regulations in force
in Cuba.
4. The rice imported from the United States of America,
against the basic tariff quota of 3,250,000 quintals or
against the deficit tariff quota mentioned above, shall
be subject, on importation into Cuba, to customs duties
no higher than 1.85 pesos per one hundred kilograms
in accordance with the provisions of Item 253-B, Part
II, Schedule IX of the General Agreement on Tariffs
and Trade and the note to that Item.
5. This agreement shall be subject to review, if so re-
quested by either the Government of the Republic of
Cuba, or the Government of the United States of
America.
If the Government of the United States of America
concurs in the above, the present note and the reply of
Your Excellency to that effect will be considered as con-
firmation of the agreement reached by our respective
Governments in the negotiations referred to above.
I take this opportunity to reiterate to Tour Excellency
my most distinguished consideration.
In reply thereto, I am pleased to inform your
Excellency that my Government is in agreement
with the contents of the note set forth above.
Accept, Excellency, the renewed assurances of
my highest consideration.
President Orders Investigation
Into Effects of Rye Imports
White House press release dated May 20
The President on May 20 directed the U.S.
Tariff Commission immediately to make a second
investigation into the effects of imports of rye,
including rye flour and meal, on the domestic
support program for rye and on the amount of
products processed in the United States from
domestic rye.
The President's action was taken in response
to a request from the Secretary of Agriculture.
The Commission's investigation will be made pur-
suant to section 22 of the Agricultural Adjust-
ment Act, as amended.
On March 31, 1954, the President issued a pro-
clamation 1 restricting imports of rye, including
rye flour and meal, from all sources to 31 million
pounds during the period April 1, 1954, through
June 30, 1954, and restricting such imports from
July 1, 1954, through June 30, 1955, to 186 million
pounds.
President's Letter to Chairman of Tariff Commission
Dear Mr. Chairman : I have been advised by
the Secretary of Agriculture that there is reason
to believe that, in the absence of a continuation of
import controls, rye, including flour and meal, is
practically certain to be imported into the United
States in 1955-56, under such conditions and in
such quantities as to render or tend to render in-
effective or materially interfere with the price sup-
port program for rye undertaken by the Depart-
ment of Agriculture pursuant to Sections 301 and
401 of the Agricultural Act of 1949, as amended,
or to reduce substantially the amount of products
processed in the United States from domestic rye.
The Tariff Commission is directed to make an im-
mediate investigation of this matter in accordance
with Executive Order No. 7233, dated November
23, 1935, promulgating regulations governing in-
vestigations under Section 22 of the Agricultural
Adjustment Act, as amended. The investigation
and report of findings and recommendations of the
Tariff Commission should be completed as
promptly as practicable to permit a decision as to
the proper action necessary under Section 22, prior
to the expiration of present controls on June 30,
1955.
A copy of a letter from the Secretary of Agri-
culture relative to this investigation is enclosed. 2
Sincerely,
Dwight D. Eisenhower
1 Bulletin of Apr. 12, 1954, p. 565.
3 Not printed.
28
Department of State Bulletin
Highlights of the Mutual Security Program for 1956
Statement by Harold E. Stassen
Director, Foreign Operations Administration 1
I appreciate the opportunity to appear before
you today in support of President Eisenhower's
request for authority and funds in the amount of
$3.53 billion to carry out the mutual security pro-
gram during fiscal year 1956.
On May 25th the Secretary of State, in a bril-
liant statement before this committee, outlined
the basic foreign policy considerations which lay
behind the President's request for this program
during the coming fiscal year. 2 I will not presume
to repeat or elaborate on his statement, except to
add my own view that we are now entering a new
era of tremendous challenge and opportunity for
the United States and for the entire free world,
an era which must not be approached in a spirit
of complacency but which can be approached with
great confidence and hope for all peoples.
President Eisenhower, in his April 20th mes-
sage transmitting the mutual security program
request to the Congress, stated that this program
is directed toward the fixed and unwavering ob-
jective of a just, prosperous, and enduring peace
and is an indispensable part of a realistic and en-
lightened national policy for the United States. 3
Significant Progress
Throughout the period following World War
II, this program and its predecessors have been
an essential element in the attainment of important
results in the direction of peace and security
1 Made before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs
on June 8.
' Bulletin of June 6, 1955, p. 911. For Secretary Dulles'
testimony before the Senate Committee on Foreign Rela-
tions on May 5, see ibid., May 23, 1955, p. 854.
"Ibid., May 2, 1955, p. 711.
throughout the world. The Marshall plan was
an indispensable factor in the remarkable eco-
nomic recovery which the countries of Western
Europe have achieved. The military assistance
which has been furnished to our allies in Nato and
to other countries in the free world has provided
a firm foundation for collective defensive strength
and has served as an effective deterrent against
Communist military aggression. Technical coop-
eration and limited economic assistance to under-
developed nations have aroused a spirit of hope
and confidence for further progress for more than
one-half of the world's population who have long
suffered from extreme want and privation.
Through contributions to programs of the United
Nations and other multilateral organizations, the
United States has played an important part in
implementing the enlightened statement of objec-
tives which were adhered to by a devastated but
hopeful world 10 years ago in San Francisco.
Progress has indeed been significant. There is
a clear feeling, both at home and abroad, that a
momentum of forward progress has been set in
motion which, if sustained, may ultimately result
in a basis for the solution of world problems
through peaceful means and without recourse to a
war which could mean the destruction of civiliza-
tion.
The people of the United States can indeed feel
a deep and humble satisfaction from the important
role which they have played in bringing the world
this far along the road toward a secure peace.
Throughout the critical years, this committee,
the Foreign Eelations Committee of the Senate,
and the Congress as a whole have displayed a lead-
ership and an initiative which has made this prog-
ress possible.
July 4, 1955
29
As we move forward in hope and confidence,
however, we must recognize that much remains
to be done. Although the foundations for military
security of the free world have been laid, we have
not yet achieved a situation of strength sufficient
to avert the risk of large-scale hostile attack. Al-
though the beneficial effects of technical coopera-
tion are being felt in 60 nations throughout the
world, we must recognize that progress in reliev-
ing the dire conditions of need in underdeveloped
countries is only beginning, and we must plan to
continue our cooperative efforts over a period of
many years to come. Although immediate and
pressing needs in the economic field have been met
through the furnishing of economic assistance to
certain key areas, critical situations still exist, and
will arise, which must be met if friendly nations
are to attain the political and economic capacity
to exercise a constructive role as partners in meet-
ing the common objectives of all free nations. It
is for these reasons that the President has re-
quested a continuation of the mutual security pro-
gram as a concrete demonstration of the determi-
nation of the American people to help carry this
crucial work forward to a successful conclusion.
The details of our program request are contained
in the documents before you, and representatives
of the Departments of State and of Defense and
the Foreign Operations Administration are availa-
ble to elaborate further and to answer questions
which the members of this committee may wish to
raise on any portion of the program. In view of
the fact that this committee is already familiar
with the basic elements of the request of the Presi-
dent, I would like to confine my remarks this
morning to a few of the highlights of the program
which bear particular emphasis and to respond
to any questions which you may wish to raise.
SURPLUS AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES
FOA Has Sold More Than $600 Million in FY 1954 and FY 1955
l,on ^program Sales Proceeds Are to be Used
Target ,
rt ... .. For These Purposes:
Obligations r
through
April 30, '55
Development
$245 Million I 402 .^I Assistance^
FY 1954 FY 1955
'Mutual Security Act of 1951, as amended.
'Mutual Security Act of 1954.
'Sales proceeds are 7.25 million in dollar equivalents under the dollar cost of commodities
612 Million
in Dollar Equivalents
30
Department of State Bulletin
Funds for Europe
You will note that no funds are requested for
economic assistance to the original Marshall plan
countries. Defense support assistance is requested,
however, for Spain and Yugoslavia, who were not
members of the Marshall plan.
Spain has recently granted the United States
access to valuable sites for military facilities, and
her armed forces are being strengthened through
military assistance, but the economy of the country
lacks adequate strength. Under arrangements
with the Spanish Government, a major portion
of the local currency generated from the sale of
defense support commodities in Spain is directly
applied toward meeting the costs of construction
and maintenance of United States facilities in the
country.
Yugoslavia remains firmly independent of the
Cominform. This fact in itself is of considerable
importance to the rest of Europe. In addition, this
country has entered into cooperative arrangements
with Turkey and with Greece. It is planned to
continue defense support and direct-forces support
assistance to this important country, to strengthen
the economic base for their defense effort.
The total of nonmilitary funds programed for
Europe in the coming year amounts to $95 million,
which includes, in addition to programs for Spain
and Yugoslavia, continuing economic support for
the city of Berlin and limited funds for technical
exchange, directed primarily toward improving
levels of productivity. The promotion of under-
standing as to the means by which great economic
and social advances have been made under our
system of free institutions is playing its part in
rolling back the threat of Communist subversion
and domination on the continent of Europe, and
this important work should be carried forward.
Arc of Free Asia
The most pressing threats to world security and
stability are now centered in Asia, and the pre-
ponderance of funds requested for fiscal year 1956
are to be directed toward meeting the threats to
this area.
Asia is the focal point of present Communist
pressure and the area whose future direction,
either toward domination by communism, or free-
dom and independence, will be crucial in the long-
range struggle of freedom against oppression.
In addition to direct military assistance, funds
are requested in the amount of $1,113,500,000
to meet the defense support and direct-forces
support needs of free Asian countries which
are under the constant threat of overt Com-
munist aggression as well as internal subversion.
A major part of these funds is proposed for pro-
grams in Korea, Formosa, Cambodia, Laos, and
Viet-Nam, all of which are confronted with situa-
tions of immediate crisis. Funds are also included
within this total for similar types of support to
Pakistan, Thailand, and the Philippines, who have
firmly and courageously taken their stand on the
side of freedom against aggression and have
joined with us in the Manila Pact organization.
Funds are also requested for a continuation of
development assistance in Asia, principally for
India. The 370 million people of India are now
engaged in an unprecedented effort to wage a suc-
cessful struggle against serious economic distress,
under a democratic form of government. The
eyes of all of Asia are focused on this great effort.
The recent election in Andhra, in which local
Communist forces were roundly defeated, reflects
real progress. If this progress is to be continued,
the momentum of economic advance must be sus-
tained, and it is proposed that the United States
continue to play a marginal but important role
in this process.
In addition to regular country programs, the
mutual security program for fiscal year 1956 con-
tains a request for a special Presidential fund of
$200 million for stimulating economic growth and
development throughout the entire arc of free
Asia. Within this area 770 million people, or
one-third of the world's population, reside. It is
important to the United States and to the entire
free world that these countries, individually and
through cooperation with one another, find the
means of becoming effective and profitable part-
ners in an expanding free-world economy and of
providing a better life for their peoples.
Success cannot come overnight and must depend
largely on the efforts of the Asians themselves.
A relatively modest amount of assistance from the
United States, however, can be a crucial element
in the process. In a recent meeting at Simla,
India, involving technical representatives of 10
of the most important free Asian countries, it was
agreed that regional economic cooperation by
Asian nations should be improved and that United
States assistance on a bilateral basis would make
a significant contribution toward needed economic
July 4, J 955
31
growth. We welcome the initiative which these
nations have taken and look forward to an in-
creasing degree of consultation and cooperation
among and with them in the future.
The President has requested, and the Senate has
approved, the use of funds for this new program
on more than a 1-year basis. It is important that
we move deliberately and carefully, in order to
insure that our investment produces the best re-
sults in the long range. Persistence, patience, care,
and understanding, coupled with prompt, effec-
tive action, are the keys to success of this program.
Near East and Africa
$309 million are requested in the mutual secu-
rity program for nonmilitary assistance in the
Near East and Africa. This amount includes
funds for continued defense and direct- forces sup-
port to our staunch Nato allies, Greece and Tur-
key, and for similar assistance to Iran, which is
on the threshold of achieving real progress in
long-delayed economic development and improved
military strength. Funds are also included for a
continuation of technical cooperation with 11
countries in the area and with the territories of
Africa. Development assistance is proposed for
Israel and for certain Arab States who presently
lack the economic resources to provide for the
basic needs of their peoples without external
assistance.
Dangerous tensions still exist between the Arab
States and Israel, and as long as this situation
persists the potentialities for progress and well-
being for all nations in the area can never be fully
realized. We are encouraged, however, by recent
evidence of constructive attitudes toward reaching
a solution to the international water problems of
32
Department of Sfafe Bulletin
COMBINE? STRENGTH OF THE FREE WORLD
IS THE KEY TO PEACE
United States
~ TTiy 1 f~
Coal
Crude Petroleu m
.■.■.■.■.•.'.■'.-.■.*.■.'.'.-.
48%;
Primary Aluminum
47%
Electric Power
Merchant Fleets
;29%
Rest Of Free World
Soviet Bloc
69%
59%
35%
39%
42%
41%
43%
68%
JXJO
3%
the Jordan Valley. Real progress in this matter
can make an important contribution to the ulti-
mate solution of the tragic problem of the Pales-
tine refugees. $65 million of the total requested
for the Near East and Africa is planned for con-
tinued support of the United Nations program
providing relief and resettlement assistance for
these long-suffering peoples.
Latin America
Funds are requested for a continuation of de-
velopment assistance and technical cooperation in
South and Central America. It is in this great
neighboring area that the concept of point 4 was
first tried and found successful. Today, technical
cooperation programs are moving forward with
19 independent nations and with overseas terri-
tories. It is particularly important that progress
be continued in this field. In addition to technical
cooperation, development assistance funds are re-
quested to meet critical economic problems in
Guatemala and Bolivia. The funds originally
estimated for Guatemala are likely to prove insuf-
ficient to meet the economic needs in that country
and other special problems in the area which may
have to be dealt with during the coming year. The
President had initially requested $21 million for
development assistance to Latin America. The
Senate, in its action on the mutual security bill on
June 2, increased this authorization to $38 million.
In addition to our bilateral programs with some
60 nations throughout the world, the mutual secu-
rity program contains requests for funds to permit
continued support of a number of special pro-
grams, such as assistance for refugees, migrants,
and escapees, ocean freight for relief goods
shipped through voluntary agencies, and the
United Nations Children's Fund and expanded
July 4, J 955
33
technical assistance program. The importance of
unwavering United States support for these
United Nations activities, which are constantly ex-
panding their constructive influence throughout
the world, is well known to this committee.
Before concluding my statement, I would like
to say a few words concerning the organization
which I have been privileged to direct during the
past 2y 2 years — the Foreign Operations Admin-
istration. I am proud to have been associated
with this agency and with the important work
which it has done in furthering the foreign policy
interests of our Government. In 3 weeks, the
functions thus far ably performed by Foa are to
be transferred by Executive order to the Inter-
national Cooperation Administration, within the
Department of State. 4 My best wishes go forward
to Mr. John B. Hollister, who has been nominated
by the President to head this new agency. I have,
every confidence that under his leadership, and
the leadership of the Secretary of State, this suc-
cessful program will become an increasingly effec-
tive element in furthering our national policy and
improving the prospects for peace — with freedom,
security, and economic well-being for ourselves
and for others.
In conclusion, I strongly urge that the Congress
act favorably on the President's mutual security
request and thus provide the basis for effective
forward progress in this time of greatest challenge
and opportunity for the free world.
Current Legislation on Foreign Policy:
84th Congress, 1st Session
Report to Congress on the Mutual Security Program. H.
Doc. 97, December 31, 1054, transmitted March 14, 1955.
65 pp.
Department of Defense Appropriations for 1956. Hearings
before the Subcommittee of the House Committee on
Appropriations. January 31-April 20, 1955.
Departments of State and Justice, the Judiciary, and
Related Agencies Appropriations for 1956. Hearings
before the Subcommittee of the House Committee on
Appropriations. February 7-17, 1955. 558 pp.
Report of the National Advisory Council on International
Monetary and Financial Problems. Message from the
President transmitting the Report for the period Octo-
ber 1, 1953, to June 30, 1954, pursuant to section 4 (b)
(5) of the Bretton Woods Agreements Act. H. Doc. 85,
February 8, 1955. 60 pp.
' Ibid., May 30, 1955, p. 889.
United States Information Agency. Hearing before the
House Committee on Foreign Affairs. February 16,
1955. 28 pp.
To Amend the Foreign Service Act of 1946. Hearings
before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs on H. R.
4941, a bill to amend the Foreign Service Act of 1946,
as amended, and for other purposes. February 17-
March 8, 1955. 139 pp.
Technical Assistance Programs. Hearings before a Sub-
committee of the Senate Committee on Foreign Rela-
tions. February 17 to March 4, 1955. 396 pp.
Departments of State and Justice, the Judiciary, and
Related Agencies Appropriations for 1956. Hearings
before the Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on
Appropriations on H. R. 5502, Making Appropriations
for the Fiscal Tear Ending June 30, 1956. February
18-May 17, 1955. 1,240 pp.
Departments of State and Justice, the Judiciary, and
Related Agencies Appropriations for 1956. Hearings
before the Subcommittee of the House Committee on
Appropriations : U.S. Information Agency. March 3-10,
1955. 287 pp.
Transportation on Canadian Vessels to and Within
Alaska. Report to accompany S. 948. S. Rept. 59,
March 11, 1955. 1 p.
Mexican Farm Labor Program. Hearings before the Sub-
committee on Equipment, Supplies, and Manpower of
the House Committee on Agriculture on H. R. 3822.
March 16-22, 1955. Serial H. 328 pp.
Review of the United Nations Charter. Hearing before a
Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Foreign Re-
lations on proposals to amend or otherwise modify
existing International peace and security organiza-
tions, including the United Nations. Part 8: Atlanta,
Ga., March 17, 1955, 1,040 pp. Part 9: Miami, Fla.,
March 18. 1955, 1,205 pp. Part 10 : San Francisco, Calif.,
April 9, 1955, 1,443 pp. Part 11 : Denver, Colo., April
11, 1955. 1,615 pp.
Foreign Service Act Amendments of 1955. Report to ac-
company H. R. 4941. H. Rept. 229, March 18, 1955.
23 pp.
Foreign Claims Settlement Commission. Hearings before
the House Committee on Foreign Affairs on draft legis-
lation to amend the International Claims Settlement
Act of 1949, as amended, and for other purposes.
March 22-April 22, 1955. 230 pp.
Report on Audit of Export-Import Bank of Washington
for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1954. Letter from
the Assistant Comptroller General of the United States
transmitting a Report pursuant to the Government Cor-
poration Control Act (31 U. S. C. 841). H. Doc. 116,
March 24, 1955. 11 p.
Survey Mission to the Far East, South Asia, and the
Middle East. Report by Congressmen John M. Vorys
and James P. Richards to the House Committee on
Foreign Affairs. H. Rept. 295, March 24, 1955. 13 pp.
Statement by Gen. Alfred M. Gruenther, USA, Supreme
Allied Commander, Europe, and United States Com-
mander In Chief, Europe. Hearing before the Senate
Committee on Foreign Relations on NATO and the Paris
Accords relating to West Germany. March 26, 1955.
17 pp.
Protocol on the Termination of the Occupation Regime in
the Federal Republic of Germany and Protocol to the
North Atlantic Treaty on the Accession of the Federal
Republic of Germany. Hearings before the Senate
Committee on Foreign Relations on Executives L and
M, S3d Congress, 2d Session. March 29-30, 1955. 93
pp.
FOA Grain Storage Elevators in Pakistan. Hearings be-
fore the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of
the Senate Committee on Government Operations. Part
1 : March 31 and April 6, 1955. 120 pp. Part 2 : April
14 and 15 and May 3, 1955. 2S2 pp.
34
Department of State Bulletin
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND CONFERENCES
Calendar of Meetings 1
Adjourned during June 195S
Gatt Tariff Negotiations With Japan Geneva Feb. 21-June 8
Fao Committee on Commodity Problems: 25th Session Rome May 23-June 3
10th International Mediterranean Fair Palermo May 24-June 10
International Sports Exhibition Turin May 24-June 19
Inter-American Commission of Women: 10th Assembly San Juan May 29-June 18
Canadian International Trade Fair Toronto May 30-June 10
6th International Technical Conference on Lighthouses and Other The Hague May 31-June 4
Aids to Navigation.
Icao Assembly: 9th Session Montreal May 31-June 13
5th International Congress on Large Dams Paris May 31-June 17
International Samples Fair Barcelona June 1-20
Ilo Annual Conference: 38th Session Geneva June 1-25
International Sugar Council: 4th Session London June 1-3
Iasi Committee on Statistical Education: 1st Session Quitandinha June 3-8
I asi Committee on Improvement of National Statistics: 3d Session . Quitandinha June 3-8
International Commission for Northwest Atlantic Fisheries: 5th Ottawa June 6-11
Annual Meeting.
Fao Council: 21st Session Rome June 6-17
Permanent International Association of Navigation Congresses: Paris June 7-9
Annual Meeting.
Agriculture Show Denbigh (Jamaica) June 8-9
3d Inter-American Statistical Conference Quitandinha June 9-22
Inter-American Statistical Institute: 3d General Assembly .... Quitandinha June 9 and 21
21st International Aeronautical Exhibition Paris June 10-19
Customs Cooperation Council Brussels June 13 (1 day)
Unicef Committee on Administrative Budget New \ ork June 13-14
Tripartite Meeting (France, U. K., U. S.) New York June 16-17
International Cotton Advisory Committee: 14th Plenary Meeting . Paris June 20-25
Inter-American Travel Congress, Permanent Executive Committee: Washington June 20-24
1st Meeting.
U. N. 10th Anniversary Commemorative Ceremony San Francisco June 20-26
International Tin Study Group, Management Committee: 30th Bonn June 24-26
Meeting.
In Session as of June 30, 1955
TJ. N. Trusteeship Council: 16th Session New York June 8—
International Exhibition of Architecture, Industrial Design, Home Halsingborg June 10-
Furnishings, and Crafts.
Icao Airworthiness Panel of Airworthiness Division: 2d Meeting . Paris June 14-
Council of the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty: Meeting Karachi June 20-
of Economic Advisers.
Intersessional Committee of the Contracting Parties to the Gatt . Geneva June 23-
5th International Film Festival Berlin June 24-
International Statistical Institute: 29th Session Quitandinha June 24-
Itu International Telegraph Consultative Committee: Study Geneva June 28-
Group VI.
International Wheat Council: 17th Session London June 28-
Scheduled July 1-September 30, 1955
UNESCO-International Bureau of Education: 18th International Geneva July 4-
Conference on Public Education.
'Prepared in the Office of International Conferences, June 22, 1955. Following is a list of abbreviations: Gatt,
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade; Fao, Food and Agriculture Organization; Icao, International Civil Aviation
Organization; Ilo, International Labor Organization; Iasi, Inter-American Statistical Institute; Unicef, United Na-
tions Children's Fund ; U.N., United Nations ; Itu, International Telecommunication Union ; Unesco, United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization ; Ecafe, Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East; Paso,
Pan American Sanitary Organization ; Who, World Health Organization.
July 4, 1955 35
Scheduled July 1-September 30, 1955 — Continued
Ittt International Telegraph Consultative Committee: Study Geneva July 4-
Group X.
U. X. Economic and Social Council: 20th Session Geneva July 5
International Whaling Commission: 7th Meeting Moscow July 16-
18th Conference of International Union of Pure and Applied Chem- Zurich July 20-
istry: and 14th International Congress of Pure and Applied
Chemistry.
American International Institute for the Protection of Childhood: Montevideo July 25
Meeting of Directing Council.
Pan American Institute of Geography and History (Paigh): 6th Mexico, D.F July 25-
General Assembly.
Paigh Commission on Cartography: 7th Consultation Mexico, D.F July 25-
Paigh Commission on Geography: 4th Consultation Mexico, D.F July 25-
Paigh Commission on History: 3d Consultation Mexico, D.F July 25-
3d International Congress of Biochemistry Brussels Aug. 1—
Advisory Committee to the I". N. Secretary-General on Peaceful Geneva Aug. 3—
L'ses of Atomic Energy: 3d Meeting.
U. N. International Conference on Peaceful Uses of Atomic Geneva Aug. 8—
Energy.
International Council of Scientific Unions: 7th General Assembly . Oslo Aug. 8-
Conference of British Commonwealth Survey Officers Cambridge (England) . . . Aug. 15-
9th International Edinburgh Film Festival Edinburgh Aug. 21—
Fao Meeting on Livestock Production under Tropical Conditions . Brisbane Aug. 22-
International Wool Textile Research Conference Sydney Aug. 22-
lst U. X. Congress on Prevention of Crime and Treatment of Geneva Aug. 22—
Offenders.
16th International Exhibition of Cinematographic Art Venice Aug. 25-
Inter-Parliamentary Union: 44th Congress Helsinki Aug. 25—
International Committee on Military Medicine and Pharmacy . . Istanbul Aug. 28-
International Astronomical Union: 9th General Assembly .... Dublin Aug. 29-
14th International Horticultural Congress Scheveningen (Xetherlands) . Aug. 29—
International Association for Hydraulic Research: 6th Plenary Delft (Xetherlands) .... Aug. 29-
Meeting.
U. X. Economic Commission for Latin America (Ecla) : 6th Bogotd Aug. 29-
Session.
Icao Second Air Xavigation Conference Montreal Aug. 30-
U. N. Ecafe Iron and Steel Subcommittee: 6th Session .... Bangkok August
Icao Legal Committee: Subcommittee on Chartering and Hiring Paris or The Hague .... Sept. 1-
of Aircraft.
Damascus International Fair Damascus Sept. 2—
3d Pakistan International Industries Fair Karachi Sept. 2-
20th Salonika International Trade Fair Salonika Sept. 4—
International Commission for Criminal Police: 24th General Istanbul Sept. 5-
Assembly.
Icao Diplomatic Conference for the Purpose of Finalizing the Proto- The Hague Sept. 6-
col of Amendment of the Warsaw Convention.
Paso Executive Committee: 26th and 27th Meetings Washington Sept. 6—
International Scientific Tobacco Congress Paris Sept. 6-
Paso Directing Council: 8th Meeting; Regional Committee of Who: Washington Sept. 8-
7th Meeting.
Unicef Executive Board and Program Committee Xew York. Sept. 8-
19th Levant Fair Bari Sept. 9-
International Rubber Study Group: Management Committee London Sept. 9—
Meeting.
International Congress on Cosmic Radiation Mexico, D.F Sept. 10-
International Union of Public Transport: 31st Congress Xaples Sept. 11-
Unesco International Congress of Libraries and Documentation Brussels Sept. 11-
Centers.
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and Istanbul Sept. 12-
International Monetary Fund: 10th Annual Meeting of Boards
of Governors.
U. X. Ecafe Working Party of Experts on Hydrologic Terminology. Bangkok Sept. 12-
U. X. Committee on Information from Xon-Self-Governing Ter- Xew York Sept. 15-
ritories: Reconvened 6th Session.
Marseille International Fair Marseille Sept. 17—
U. X. General Assembly: 10th Session Xew York Sept. 20-
Fao Latin American Forestry Commission: 5th Session Venezuela Sept. 26-
Ilo Textiles Committee: 5th Session Geneva Sept. 26-
U. X. Economic Commission for Europe (Ece): 3d Conference of Geneva Sept. 26-
Statisticians.
Consultative Committee for Economic Development in Southeast Singapore Sept. 29-
Asia ("Colombo Plan"): Officials Meeting.
Fao Indo-Pacific Fisheries Council: 6th Meeting Tokyo Sept. 30-
36 Department of Stale Bulletin
TREATY INFORMATION
Educational Exchange Agreement
With Norway Renewed
The Department of State announced on June
15 (press release 355) that the United States and
Norway had that day renewed for a second 5-year
period an educational exchange agreement under
the Fulbright Act. 1 The agreement, signed in
Oslo by U.S. Ambassador L. Corrin Strong and
Norwegian Foreign Minister Halyard M. Lange,
on behalf of their respective Governments, pro-
vides the equivalent of $1,250,000 in Norwegian
kroner to continue the program for another 5 years
at an annual expenditure of the equivalent of
$250,000 a year. These moneys will be used to
finance travel of Norwegians to the United States
for study, teaching, lecturing, or advanced re-
search and to pay travel and maintenance costs
for Americans to go to Norway for similar
purposes.
Nearly 900 exchanges have taken place since
the program began in 1949.
U.S. and Netherlands Sign
Income-Tax Protocol
Press release 357 dated June 15
Joint Statement
On June 15, 1955, Secretary of State John
Foster Dulles and the Ambassador of the Nether-
lands, His Excellency Dr. J. H. van Eoijen, signed
a protocol supplementing the convention of April
29, 1948 2 between the United States and the
Netherlands for the avoidance of double taxation
with respect to taxes on income and certain other
taxes.
The object of the protocol is to effect certain
modifications in the convention for the purpose of
facilitating extension of the convention to the
Netherlands Antilles (Dutch "West Indies). The
1 For an announcement of the original agreement, signed
at Oslo on May 25, 1949, see Bulletin of June 5, 1949,
p. 731.
s Bulletin- of May 9, 194S, p. 611.
protocol will be submitted to the United States
Senate for advice and consent to ratification and
to be considered in conjunction with a proposal,
presently under consideration in the Senate Com-
mittee on Foreign Relations (S. Exec. I, 83d
Cong., 2d sess.) , for extending the operation of the
convention, with certain limitations, to the Neth-
erlands Antilles.
The protocol contains two substantive articles.
One of them would have the effect of modifying
the credit article of the 1948 convention in order
to set forth precisely the deduction or credit which
the Antilles shall allow against its tax for income
tax paid to the United States by United States
citizens resident in the Antilles with respect to
income they receive from sources within the
United States. The other substantive article
would modify the extension-procedure article of
the 1948 convention so that the convention would
apply as between the United States and the
Netherlands Antilles on and after January 1 im-
mediately preceding the date on which the pro-
cedure prescribed in the convention had been
completed.
A third article of the protocol provides that it
shall be regarded as an integral part of the con-
vention, that it shall be ratified and instruments of
ratification shall be exchanged, and that the pro-
tocol shall enter into force on the date of such
exchange.
Current Actions
MULTILATERAL
Austria
State treaty for the re-establishment of an independent
and democratic Austria. Signed at Vienna May 15,
1955. 1
Senate ml rice and consent to ratification given: June
27, 1955.
BILATERAL
Belgium
Agreement for cooperation concerning the civil uses of
atomic energy. Signed at Washington June 15, 1955.
Enters into force on the date of receipt by Belgium of
a notification from the United States that a period of
30 days has elapsed as required by United States law.
Canada
Agreement for cooperation on civil uses of atomic energy.
Signed at Washington June 15, 1955. Enters into force
1 Not in force.
July 4, 1955
37
on the date of receipt by Canada of a notification from
the United States that a period of 30 days has elapsed
as required by United States law.
Cuba
Agreement extending the air force mission agreement of
December 22, 1950, as extended (TIAS 2166, 2698, and
2869). Effected by exchange of notes at Washington
May 3 and 17, 1955. Entered into force May 17, 1955.
Agreement extending the army mission agreement of Au-
gust 28, 1951 (TIAS 2309), as extended. Effected by
exchange of notes at Washington May 3 and 17, 1955.
Entered into force May 17, 1955.
Dominican Republic
Agreement extending the agreement for a cooperative edu-
cation program of March 16, 1951 (TIAS 2244), as
amended. Effected by exchange of notes at Ciudad
Trujillo April 19 and May 5, 1955. Entered into force
May 5, 1955.
Ecuador
Agreement extending the agreement for a cooperative
health and sanitation program of September 15, 1950
(TIAS 2147). Effected by exchange of notes at Quito
March 17 and April 12, 1955. Entered into force April
18, 1955 (upon signature of operational extension
agreement).
Netherlands
Protocol supplementing the convention with respect to
taxes on income and certain other taxes for the purpose
of facilitating extension to Netherlands Antilles.
Signed at Washington June 15, 1955. Enters into force
on the date of exchange of ratifications.
Peru
Agreement extending the agreement for a cooperative edu-
cation program of September 25 and 29, 1950 (TIAS
2160). Effected by exchange of notes signed at Lima
February 23 and April 26, 1955. Entered into force
April 28, 1955 (upon signature of operational extension
agreement).
United Kingdom
Agreement for cooperation on civil uses of atomic energy.
Signed at Washington June 15, 1955. Enters into force
on the date on which each Government receives from
the other Government written notification that it has
complied with all statutory and constitutional require-
ments for entry into force.
Agreement relating to additional funds to be made avail-
able by the United Kingdom for the continued operation
of the United States Educational Commission. Effected
by exchange of notes at London May 23, 1955. Entered
into force May 23, 1955.
Uruguay
Agreement for a program of industrial productivity.
Signed at Montevideo May 23, 1955. Will enter into
force on date of a communication in writing notifying
the United States Government of Uruguay's ratification.
PUBLICATIONS
Recent Releases
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Gov-
ernment Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C. Address
requests direct to the Superintendent of Documents, ex-
cept in the case of free publications, which may be ob-
tained from the Department of State.
Tenth Inter-American Conference. Pub. 5692. Interna-
tiona] Organization and Conference Series II, American
Republics 14. 221 pp. 65<«.
Report of the delegation of the United States of America,
with related documents, on the Tenth Inter-American Con-
ference held at Caracas, Venezuela, March 1-28, 1954.
U.S. Policy in the Near East, South Asia, and Africa —
1954. Pub. 5801. Near the Middle Eastern Series 18.
72 pp. 30tf.
A pamphlet dealing with some problems in the area, and
the mutual security and assistance programs administered
there.
Your Department of State. Pub. 5839. Department and
Foreign Service Series 43. 6 pp. 5tf.
A 6-page leaflet which gives pertinent facts about the
Department of State.
Copyright. TIAS 2906. Pub. 5486. 18 pp. lOtf.
Provisional arrangement between the United States and
Japan. Exchange of notes — Signed at Tokyo November
10, 1953. Entered into force November 10, 1953 ; operative
retroactively April 2S, 1952 and related exchanges of
notes — Signed at Tokyo November 10, 1953.
Passport Visas, Validity of Nonimmigrant Visas and
Schedule of Fees. TIAS 2912. Pub. 5411. 18 pp. 10tf.
Agreement between the United States and Mexico. Ex-
change of notes — Dated at Mexico October 28, November
10 and 12, 1953. Entered into force November 12, 1953
with related exchange of notes — Dated at Mexico Novem-
ber 10 and 12, 1953.
Health and Sanitation, Cooperative Program in Bolivia —
Additional Financial Contributions. TIAS 2915. Pub.
5401. 6 pp. 5tf.
Agreement between the United States and Bolivia. Ex-
change of notes — Dated at La Paz February 7 and June 27,
1952. Entered into force June 27, 1952.
THE DEPARTMENT
Designations
Cecil B. Lyon as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Inter-
American Affairs, effective June 28 (press release 329
dated June 8).
Defense, Loan of Vessels to China. TIAS 2916. Pub.
5406. 11 pp. 10tf.
Agreement between the United States and China. Ex-
change of notes — Signed at Taipei January 13, 1954.
Entered into force January 13, 1954.
Technical Cooperation, Litani River Survey Project.
TIAS 2920. Pub. 5423. 4 pp. 5tf.
Agreement between the United States and Lebanon. Ex-
change of notes — Signed at Beirut February 15, 21, and
24, 1951. Entered into force February 24, 1951.
38
Deparfmenf of State Bulletin
July 4, 1955
Ind
ex
Vol. XXXIII, No. 836
Agriculture
President Orders Investigation Into Effects of Rye
Imports 28
U.S.-Cuban Agreement on Rice Tariff Quotas 27
Canada
Joint Commission Asked To Investigate Resources of St.
Croix River Basin 21
U.S. Canadian Agreement on Distant Early Warning Sys-
tem (texts of notes) 22
Claims and Property. Cuban Government Makes Payment
of Adjudicated Claims 27
Cuba
Cuban Government Makes Payment of Adjudicated
Claims 27
U.S.-Cuban Agreement on Rice Tariff Quotas 27
Congress. The
Current Legislation 34
Highlights of the Mutual Security Program for 1056
(Stassen) , 29
Text of Concurrent Resolution on Renewed Efforts for
Peace 4
Economic Affairs
Enactment of Trade Agreements Extension Act of 1955
(Eisenhower) 25
Joint Commission Asked To Investigate Resources of St.
Croix River Basin 21
President Orders Investigation Into Effects of Rye
Imports 28
Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested by Five
Nations 26
U.S. and Netherlands Sign Income-Tax Protocol .... 37
U.S.-Cuban Agreement on Rice Tariff Quotas 27
Educational Exchange. Educational Exchange Agreement
With Norway Renewed 37
Germany
Anniversary of June 17 Uprising (Conant) 15
Our New Partner — The Federal Republic of Germany
(Conant) 12
India. Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested by
Five Nations 26
International Organizations and Meetings. Calendar of
Meetings 35
Korea. Status of 21 Americans Who Refused Repatria-
tion 20
Military Affairs
Status of 21 Americans Who Refused Repatriation ... 20
U.S. -Canadian Agreement on Distant Early Warning Sys-
tem (texts of notes) 22
Mutual Security
Highlights of the Mutual Security Program for 1956
(Stassen) . 29
U.S. -Canadian Agreement on Distant Early Warning Sys-
tem (texts of notes) 22
Netherlands
Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested by Five
Nations 26
U.S. and Netherlands Sign Iucome-Tax Protocol .... 37
Nicaragua. Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested
by Five Nations 26
Norway
Educational Exchange Agreement With Norway Renewed . 37
Pakistan. Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested
by Five Nations 26
Presidential Documents. President Orders Investigation
Into Effects of Rye Imports 28
Publications. Recent Releases 38
State, Department of. Designation (Lyon) 38
Sweden. Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested
by Five Nations 26
Treaty Information
Current Actions 37
Educational Exchange Agreement With Norway Renewed . 37
Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested by Five
Nations 26
U.S. and Netherlands Sign Income-Tax Protocol .... 37
U.S.-Canadian Agreement on Distant Early Warning Sys-
tem (texts of notes) 22
U.S.-Cuban Agreement on Rice Tariff Quotas 27
Turkey. Letters of Credence (Gork) 20
U.S.S.R. U.S.S.R. Agrees on Time and Place for Four-
Power Meeting (text of Soviet note) 20
United Nations
The Moral Foundation of the United Nations (Dulles) . . 10
Tenth Anniversary of the United Nations (Eisenhower,
Dulles) 3
Name Index
Dulles, Secretary 6, 10
Eisenhower, President 3, 25, 28
Gork, Haydar 20
Lyon, Cecil B 38
Stassen, Harold E 29
Conant, James B 12, 15
Check List of Department of State
Press Releases: June 20 26
Releases may be obtained from the News Division,
Department of State, Washington, D. C.
Press releases issuetl prior to June 20 which ap-
pear in this issue of the Bulletin are Nos. 329 of
June 8, 348 and 349 of June 13, 355 and 357 of June
15, 360 and 362 of June 16, 363 of June 17, and
366 of June 19.
Subject
Military assistance agreement with
Guatemala.
Baker nomination.
U.S.-U.K. atomic agreement for mutual
defense.
TJ.S.-Canada atomic agreement for
mutual defense.
Atoms-for-peace agreement with Chile.
Villard designation.
Turkey credentials (rewrite).
Study of domestic tuna industry.
Committee on agriculturists visiting
U.S.S.R.
Atoms-for-peace agreement with Japan.
Holland : testimony on sugar act.
Educational exchange.
Atoms-for-peace agreement with
Greece.
Agricultural representatives to
U.S.S.R.
Itinerary for Prime Minister U Nu.
Atoms-for-peace agreement with Uru-
guay.
Dulles : U.N. 10th anniversary.
Refugee ships.
Aid to Greece.
Surplus commodity agreement with
Colombia.
Murphy : "Germany in the Free World."
Agricultural representative to U.S.S.R.
Renegotiation of tariff concessions.
Payment of claims by Cuba.
*Not printed.
fHeld for a later issue of the Bulletin.
No.
Date
t367
6/20
*368
6/20
t369
6/20
t370
6/20
*371
6/20
*372
6/20
373
6/21
f374
6/21
,375
6/21
•376
6/21
t377
6/22
*378
6/22
♦379
6/22
,380 6/22
*381
6/23
*382
6/24
383
6/24
t384
6/24
t385
6/24
t386
6/24
t387
6/24
t388
6/24
389
6/24
390
6/25
U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: I95S
<ms>
the
Department
of
State
Order Form
To: Supt. of Documents
Govt. Printing Offic*
Washington 25, D.C.
Enclosed And:
(cask, check, or
maneu order).
United States
Government Printing Office
DIVISION OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS
Washington 25, D. C.
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE TO AVOID
PAYMENT OF POSTAGE, £300
(GPOI
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy
Pub. 5888
150
An illustrated layman's guide to "The Atoms-for-Peace Pro-
gram" to which President Eisenhower has committed the
Nation, pledging it before the United Nations General As-
sembly "to devote its entire heart and mind to find the way
by which the miraculous inventiveness of man shall not be
dedicated to his death, but consecrated to his life."
The pamphlet offers a concise account of the history and
development of the peaceful uses of atomic energy. These
are some of the subjects treated :
The Promise of Atomic Energy
The Origin of the Atoms-for-Peace Program
The Background of the U.S. Proposals
The United Nations Atoms-for-Peace Resolution
The International Atomic Energy Agency — its origin,
development, status, and future activities
The International Conference on the Peaceful Uses of
Atomic Energy
Education and Training in Atomic Reactor Technology —
which includes a description of the reactor school at
Argonne National Laboratory and Aec's school for
isotope study at Oak Ridge
Copies of Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy may be purchased
for 15 cents from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C.
Please send me copies of Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy.
Name:
Street Address:
City, Zone, and State:
i
<JJi€/ z!l)eAcwt'>nen>t/ xw <Jta/te/
Vol. XXXIII, No. 837
July 11, 1955
GERMANY IN THE FREE WORLD • by Deputy Under
Secretary Murphy 43
ATOMIC ENERGY AGREEMENTS
Atoms-for-Peace Agreement With Turkey (text) .... 55
Agreements With Belgium, Canada, U.K. on Civil Uses of
Atomic Energy 58
Atomic Agreements for Mutual Defense With Canada and
U.K. (texts) 59
GENEVA CONVENTIONS FOR PROTECTION OF WAR
VICTIMS • Statement by Deputy Under Secretary Murphy . 69
For index see inside back cover
Boston Public Library
Superintend of Documents
AUG 1 1 1955
tJne z/)e/iawfone , yit c£ tftate
bulletin
Vol. XXXIII, No. 837 . Publication 5918
July 11, 1955
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents
U.S. Government Printing Office
Washington 25, D.O.
Price:
62 issues, domestic $7.50, foreign $10.25
Single copy, 20 cents
The printing of this publication has
been approved by the Director of the
Bureau of the Budget (January 19, 1955) .
Note: Contents of this publication are not
copyrighted and items contained herein may
be reprinted. Citation of the Department
of State Bulletin as the source will be
appreciated.
The Department of State BULLETIN,
a weekly publication issued by the
Public Services Division, provides the
public and interested agencies of
the Government with information on
developments in the field of foreign
relations and on the work of the De-
partment of State and the Foreign
Service. The BULLETIN includes
selected press releases on foreign pol-
icy, issued by the White House and
the Department, and statements and
addresses made by the President and
by the Secretary of State and other
officers of the Department, as well as
special articles on various phases of
international affairs and the func-
tions of the Department. Informa-
tion is included concerning treaties
and international agreements to
which the United States is or may
become a party and treaties of gen-
eral international interest.
Publications of the Department, as
well as legislative material in the field
of international relations, are listed
currently.
Germany in the Free World
by Deputy Under Secretary Murphy x
I count it a privilege to be among you on the
occasion of this timely and instructive conference
on Germany. And it has added to my pleasure in
being here that I have been able to renew my asso-
ciation with Chairman Wells. 2 It seems very
natural and appropriate that a conference on
Germany should bring us together now, for it was
Germany that drew us together in the first place.
Back in the military phase of occupation, we both
served as advisers to our good friend Lucius Clay,
President Wells on cultural and I on political
affairs. And you of course know that in those
clays Mr. Wells did the spade work for our suc-
cessful long-range program of cultural exchange
with Germany.
When he and I were colleagues in Omgtts, the
"German problem" was most conspicuously a mat-
ter of economic, political, and social reconstruc-
tion. However, it was also in our time over there
that we had our first serious brush with the
Soviets, answering their blockade of Berlin with
the air lift. It was possible to recognize that epi-
sode—although few did at the time— as the first
major overt act in what is euphemistically called
the cold war. Since then, development and prog-
ress in Germany and in German- American rela-
tions have been phenomenal. Yet degree and
scope of progress notwithstanding, there is still
and undoubtedly will be a continuing "German
problem," but its factors have changed consider-
ably since 1948.
The participants of this conference under the
happy auspices of this great university are to be
complimented on their sense of timing and also
on their sensitivity to political priorities. Ger-
1 Address made before the Indiana University Confer-
ence on Problems of American Foreign Policy at Blooming-
ton, Ind., on June 25 (press release 387 dated June 24).
2 Herman B. Wells, president of Indiana University.
many is high on the list of political priorities. It
is once again a focal point of world policies and
world tensions. Divided itself, Germany has
marked a division of Europe and, in fact, the
world. And its division makes Germany a source
of grave tensions. This role is not of Germany's
choosing ; it was forced upon a prostrate Germany
by world conditions. It is heartening on the eve
of the Geneva Conference that the participants
of this gathering should have been so quick to
recognize the elements of the German situation
for what they are and also the dependence of the
German problem for solution upon responsible
action taken by the major powers.
In reviewing the highlights of this conference
here in Bloomington as they have been related to
me, it is difficult to find a common denominator
for the variety of views expressed. Certainly the
views reflect the intensity of public interest, and
their variety reflects the controversial character
of the subject. In a sense, the discussion has been
typical. As John J. McCloy 3 once stated, Ger-
many is a country that provokes strong positive
or strong negative reactions, hardly ever permit-
ting indifference or ambivalence of approach.
Such discussions as yours provide Government
officials with an excellent opportunity to be ap-
prised of the informed opinion of private experts
and interested laymen. Soundings of this nature
are always important ; at a time when the Govern-
ment may be entering into critical international
discussion on a highly controversial subject, such
soundings are vital. It is both gratifying and
reassuring to know that the American people re-
tain a strong and active interest in the German
problem and that that interest is characterized
by appreciation of the problem's fundamental, if
not universal, implications.
3 U. S. High Commissioner for Germany, 1949-1953.
July 11, 1955
43
Your discussions have stressed a forward-look-
ing and not merely a retrospective approach. In
the past many of us have often shown a dispropor-
tionate tendency to view Germany in the light of
bygone issues, both good and bad. This is under-
standable. Indeed, we require an integrated
analysis of the past if we are to make a realistic
appraisal of either present or future contingencies.
However, in approaching the subject of Germany
today, we have to realize that we are dealing with
a new set of facts.
German Sovereignty
The first of these facts is German sovereignty.
This means that the German Federal Republic has
regained a political identity of its own. Thus it is
imperative that we judge it on its own record,
not on the record of its predecessors. It is equally
imperative that we accord the Federal Republic
the status and credit that we accord any other
sovereign nation. The Federal Republic is no
longer a dependent of the free world; it now
stands on its own feet. On May 5 of this year
the United States, with Britain and France, re-
nounced the privilege of an occupying power to
intervene in the national affairs of the Federal
Republic. 4 We do have jurisdiction in two or
three areas that were voluntarily agreed to by the
Germans, but, aside from those, we have no au-
thority over Germany. From here on out, the
Federal Republic is on its own and the course of
its internal and external policy will be deter-
mined by its elected government. We have chosen
to trust the new Germany, and we have satisfac-
tory evidence that our trust is not misplaced.
Without benefit of instructions or advice from
us, Chancellor Adenauer has responded to recent
Soviet overtures with firmness, dignity, and wis-
dom. Whether and when he will go to Moscow,
was and still is his decision and his decision
alone — but whatever he will elect to do will, we
are confident, be in the best interest not only of
the Federal Republic but in the common interest
of all free nations.
Our Partnership With Germany
The second of the facts which must be recognized
in any discussion of Germany today is that Ger-
many is our partner. Through Western European
4 Bulletin of May 16, 1955, p. 791.
44
Union, Germany is in partnership with 6 and
through Nato with 14 Western nations, not just
with the United States. This fact of partnership
introduces a set of conditions entirely different
from those of any previous period. This is the
first time in history that we and many other na-
tions have entered into a defensive alliance with
Germany. Moreover, the new relationship with
Germany is now based on the principle of multi-
lateralism and reciprocity instead of on the uni-
lateralism and protective tutelage implicit in the
occupation status. And this new relationship
confers upon both the United States and the Fed-
eral Republic certain rights and certain obliga-
tions.
The United States, for instance, is under obli-
gation to continue active support of the Atlantic
security system to make the system of Western
defense truly effective. And it stands committed
by the tripartite guaranty made by the United
States, the United Kingdom, and France in 1950
that they "will treat any attack against the Fed-
eral Republic or Berlin from any quarter as an
attack upon themselves." 5 These commitments
have been reaffirmed in a formal declaration to
the Federal Republic and West Berlin. 6
For its part, the Federal Republic is committed
to honoring its obligations under the Paris Agree-
ments. This involves, as you know, the creation
of an effective military establislunent as part and
parcel of the common defense effort of the Western
nations. The importance of the German contri-
bution has not always been properly recognized — -
in Germany as well as in the United States. It
perhaps has escaped the attention of a good many
that Germany's participation has been vital to
the development of a realistic system of forward
defense. The German effort and participation
will mean a higher measure of security notably to
the Federal Republic but also to the Western
world. The political and technical difficulties
and, above all, the psychological problems which
confront any government which has to adjust the
national community and the national economy to
the requirements of defense are well understood.
But we are also greatly impressed and heartened
by the energetic efforts of the Federal Government
and indeed of most political groups in Germany
to create a defense establishment that will be under
5 Ibid,, Oct. 2, 1950, p. 531.
8 Ibid., Oct. 11, 1954, pp. 519, 521.
Department of State Bulletin
firm civilian control. It is a great comfort to
know that the men at the helm of the new Germany
have resolved to prevent at all costs a rebirth of
old-fashioned militarism that would place in jeo-
pardy the structure of the new democracy.
Moreover, the new German defense force will
he an instrument of collective security and not of
secret national aspiration. Its size is known and
its purpose clearly and openly defined. You may
recall that at London, where the groundwork for
the Paris Pacts was laid, Chancellor Adenauer
voluntarily assumed two specific limitations. 7
First he reaffirmed an earlier public announce-
ment that Germany would of its own volition
forego the right to manufacture certain types of
weapons. Then he committed his country to re-
taining the limitations on armament and the num-
ber of divisions and size of air force laid down in
the Edc Treaty. Furthermore, the German Fed-
eral Government has agreed to conduct its policy
in accordance with the principles of the United
Nations Charter and never to resort to force in
its attempts to achieve either reunification with
the Soviet Zone of Germany or the modification
of its present boundaries.
The rights and duties of our new partnership
are not limited to the military field. Its deeper
and lasting purpose is to develop progressively
new areas of cooperation designed increasingly to
normalize our relations and to strengthen the
bonds of friendship between our peoples. In a
sense this is not actually a new departure. The
trend toward a closer relationship started some
time ago. Our agreement on cultural exchange s
and more recently the Treaty of Friendship, Com-
merce, and Navigation 9 were important mile-
stones on this road to normalcy. Indeed, the new
partnership is far more than the product of legal
papers listing rights and obligations of both par-
ties. It is more truly the expression of feelings of
friendship between the peoples and the govern-
ments and the culmination of a process of gradual
rapprochement which has been progressing stead-
ily over the past 10 years.
The New Germany
Third of the facts we must never lose sight of is
this one: Germany has changed. The Federal
' IUd., Oct. 11, 1954, p. 519.
"IUd., Aug. 4, 1952, p. 179.
"Ibid., June 22, 1953, p. 877.
Republic is not the Second Reich; it is not the
Weimar Republic; it is not the Third Reich.
Quite possibly it is not the Germany of 1960,
either. Germany is not static. It is developing
and developing fast — and I use the word "develop-
ing" in its connotation of maturing. Politically,
economically, and socially this new Germany is a
far cry from the Germany of Weimar Republic
days — let alone the Germany of the Second or
Third Reich.
If I may be permitted a personal reference, I
witnessed some of the troubles of the Weimar Re-
public. I happened to be in Munich as a young
consul from 1921 to 1925. That was in the years
of struggle of that earlier and ill-fated Republic,
and even then the handwriting was on the wall.
That Republic was the victim of inflation, of mass
unemployment, of bitterness and resentment over
the loss of World War I, and of powerful opposi-
tion from the country's most influential groups —
conservatives, imperialists, and militarists. Un-
rest, violent demonstrations, discontent were the
keynote of the times. I was in Munich when
Adolph Hitler attempted the Putsch that failed to
come off — and when he was using his enforced
leisure in Landsberg prison to write Mein Kampf.
The whole world knows of the Federal Repub-
lic's phenomenal economic recovery, and the na-
tional election of September 1953, plus subsequent
local elections, should have convinced the most
skeptical of the political stability of the new Ger-
many. The elections demonstrated clearly the
broadly based support of the present government
and established the fact that the German people
repudiate extremism of either right or left. The
radical fringe groups were unable to win a single
seat in the Bundestag. There is an opposition,
as there should be, but this one — unlike its pred-
ecessors in Weimar days — is made up largely of
champions of democratic principles, civil rights,
and freedom of speech.
In its economic well-being, its political stability,
its Western orientation, and in its determination
to keep the peace, are the assurances many of us
need in contemplating German rearmament. If
the efforts of the present German Government are
successful — and there is no indication that they
will not be — the new army it is creating will have
no way of setting itself up once more as a "state
within the state." The Federal Republic has its
eyes on the future and has little inclination to
July 71, 1955
45
dwell in the past, but it has been attentive to the
lessons provided by its predecessors in what not
to do.
It is far from my thought to imply that there is
no similarity at all between the Germany of today
and the Germany of yesterday, but the differences
are impressive and fundamental. And change and
growth are continuing. The Germans are the
first to attribute the change for the better to cer-
tain external influences that have been brought to
bear on Germany. They list among them the cur-
rency reform introduced by General Clay and his
British and French colleagues in 1948, Marshall
plan aid, the McCloy fund, 10 and the cultural ex-
changes as most responsible for their recovery
and welfare. It is gratifying that they feel that
way. It is important to remember that the effec-
tiveness of the aid we provided has been due in
large measure to the intelligent and scrupulous
use to which the Germans put it and to their basic
desire to undertake honest and thorough reforms
in many important areas of public life.
And there is one more element of change which
is perhaps the most dramatic and a truly revolu-
tionary one. I refer to the gradual rapproche-
ment of France and Germany. This development,
understandably, is still in an early stage. It has
already produced tangible and most encouraging
results. The Coal and Steel Community was the
beginning of what we all hope to be an era of pro-
gressive cooperation between these two nations;
the Western European Union represents another
important advance on the road to genuine and last-
ing unity. For it is undoubtedly a truism that
European unity must be built on Franco-German
understanding — or it will never be built.
Problem of Unification
The fourth fact, and one that sometimes tends
to overshadow the other three, is that Germany is
divided and, in its division, is a potential of danger
to Europe and lands beyond. This is not the first
time that Germany has been a source of tension
in Europe and a threat to world equilibrium. But
in other times, Germany elected the role of dis-
turber of the peace. Now, Germany is the un-
happy victim of external forces — or, to be blunt,
of Soviet strategy and maneuver.
10 A Special Projects Fund established by Mr. McCloy
and administered by Hicoo for German community proj-
ects.
46
At Potsdam in the summer of 1945, our wartime
Soviet ally gave lipservice to the agreement that
there should be uniformity in the treatment of the
German people and that the four zones of occupa-
tion should be treated as an economic unit. The
Allied Control Council, composed of the military
governors of the four zones of occupation, was
soon paralyzed by Soviet intransigence and the
Soviet veto. The Soviets vetoed action to make
an economic unit of Germany; they violated the
Potsdam agreement.
From the beginning our aims for Germany and
the Soviet aspirations were at odds. Within a
year of the installation of the machinery for quad-
ripartite administration of Germany, it was ob-
vious that the Western powers wanted a self-
supporting Germany, while the Soviet Union was
interested in exploiting German industry, agri-
culture, and labor for the benefit of the U.S.S.R.
It was and no doubt still is the Kremlin aim to
draw all of Germany into the Soviet orbit.
During the summer of 1946, in the course of the
second session of the Council of Foreign Ministers
of the four occupation powers held at Paris, Sec-
retary of State James F. Byrnes stated the facts
of quadripartite control of Germany very clearly.
He said that the United States was unwilling to
share responsibility for the economic paralysis
and suffering that would result from continuation
of administering Germany "in four closed com-
partments." He invited the three other powers to
join their zones of occupation with the American
zone as an economic unit. In September 1946 at
Stuttgart, Mr. Byrnes delivered a speech that was
broadcast throughout Germany and brought hope
and new courage to the peojne. 11 In it he laid down
a constructive economic program for Germany
and warned that only a drastic fiscal reform pro-
gram applied uniformly throughout the country
could prevent ruinous inflation.
That was a turning point for Germany and for
Europe, and it was the beginning of the end of
quadripartite administration of Germany. The
Western powers introduced the currency reform
not only in their zones but also in the Western
sectors of Berlin. The Soviets responded with
the blockade — and we responded with the air lift.
Under the administration of Britain, France,
and the United States, Western Germany moved
n Bulletin of Sept. 15, 1946, p. 496.
Department of State Bulletin
toward independence and recovery. On Septem-
ber 21, 1949, the Federal Republic of Germany
was established; military government gave way
to civilian administration of the Allied High Com-
mission. 12 The Federal Republic had been
launched on troubled seas, but it charted its course
toward sovereignty and freedom.
A matter of days later, October 7 to be exact,
the Soviet authorities created a puppet German
government by military flat in the East Zone and
announced that this so-called "German Democratic
Republic," set up without benefit of elections, was
the legitimate spokesman of the German people. 13
Germany was divided, politically, economically,
and physically. The Iron Curtain had been rung
down, closing off 17 million German people in the
Soviet Zone from their relatives and friends, and
condemning them to the oppression of a Soviet-
dominated police state.
Since that time it has consistently been United
States policy to work for the reunification of Ger-
many by peaceful means. Britain and France
have joined with our Government in repeated
requests to the Soviet Union to permit reunifica-
tion on the basis of free democratic elections. Up
to the present moment, the Soviet Union has con-
sistently refused to permit reunification on any
basis that either Germany or the three Western
nations could accept. While the United States
has sought peaceful means of reunification for
Germany and supported the Federal Republic's
integration with the West, the Soviet Union has
treated the reunification issue as a political bomb —
or at times as a political prize. We all know how
the Soviet Union fought against the ratification
of the Paris Pacts to the bitter end, how it alter-
nated threats and promises in its attempts to pre-
vent German ratification. "Ratify the treaties,"
it said to the Federal Republic in effect, "and
you'll never be reunited with your brothers of the
German Democratic Republic." And out of the
other side of its mouth, it said : "Reject the treaties
and you can have reunification with free elections
tossed in." In spite of this propaganda barrage,
the German Federal Republic went ahead and
ratified the treaties, and it is now joined with the
West for purposes of defense and the common
welfare.
' Ibid., Oct. 3, 1949, p. 512.
' Ibid., Nov. 21, 1949, p. 761.
Question of German Neutrality
Since the ratifications brought the treaties into
effect, the world has been very attentive to cer-
tain indications on the part of the Soviet Union
that some kind of change is in process; whether
the change is in their tactics, their strategy, or
their hearts is a subject of widespread speculation.
Soviet acquiescence to an Austrian state treaty
after all these years raised hopes that the Soviet
Union is genuinely interested in lessening ten-
sions. Mr. Molotov's remarks made at the sign-
ing of the Austrian treaty, in making it clear that
the Soviet Union would exact German neutrality
and the Federal Republic's disavowal of the Paris
Pacts as the price of German reunification, have
aroused more speculation. "With their natural
and profound yearning for reunification," many
people ask, "can we expect the Germans to with-
stand the offer of the Soviet Union?"
The answer to that is : We can and do. At this
point, I should like to quote Secretary Dulles'
remarks to the press on May 24, 14 when questioned
about the policy of this country on the subject
of German neutrality :
It is the view of the United States that a policy of
neutrality has no application to a country of the character
of Germany. It is all well to talk about neutrality for
a country such as Austria, a small country with 7 million
people. But I do not believe that anybody realistically
believes that the German people, 70-odd million of them,
are destined to play the role of a neutral country-
What is even more to the point than our posi-
tion in regard to German neutrality, since the Fed-
eral Republic is now a sovereign state, is the posi-
tion of the Germans themselves. There is no
denying the fact that the problem of German
reunification is closely related to the important
problem of disarmament. Recently the German
Ambassador to this country, Dr. [Heinz L.]
Krekeler said : "We know that the greatest hope
for the reunification of Germany lies within a
worldwide settlement of the present tensions be-
tween East and West," and he added: "We also
know that we must not try for a reunification of
Germany at a price or under conditions which
would endanger our security." He concluded:
"We cannot possibly agree, therefore, to any plans
for a neutralization of Germany." When he made
that speech, Dr. Krekeler had just returned from
' Ibid., June 6, 1955, p. 932.
July II, 1955
47
a most important conference with Chancellor
Adenauer.
And as recently as June 14, on the occasion of
the press reception in his honor in Washington,
Chancellor Adenauer himself made a very clear
policy statement:
"In recent weeks," he said, "it has been said
that we Germans might be prepared again to sac-
rifice our partnership with the Western nations
and the obligations which we have just undertaken.
In answer to this I can assure you most emphati-
cally — Germany will honor her obligations."
"Then," he continued, "reference has also been
made to the question of neutrality or neutraliza-
tion. ... In my opinion, the neutrality or neu-
tralization of Germany would in a relatively short
time permit Soviet Kussia to extend her power
over all of Western Europe. I do not think that
the United States would desire such a thing."
I believe that understanding of the far-reaching
effects of this tragic division of Germany is in-
creasing. It is not hard to understand how the
division has set into action an element of universal
uncertainty and insecurity. Every one of us can
understand that it causes human suffering to many
thousands of German families torn cruelly apart.
And one does not need to be a psychologist to
appreciate that continued division conceivably
could stir up nationalist feelings and Irredentist
aspirations. But it is reassuring to know that the
parties supporting Chancellor Adenauer and the
majority of the German people do not intend to
barter away their new alliances with the West for
specious promises.
Unification and International Tension
Our own position with respect to German uni-
fication has been clearly defined. We have given
wholehearted support to the Germans in their de-
termination not to accept a status quo that is based
on the dismemberment of their nation. As a mat-
ter of fact, we Americans have never had much
reverence for the sanctity of the status quo. A
stafrts quo in this instance is unacceptable for both
humanitarian and political reasons. To us the
partition of Germany is far more than a mere
symptom of global malaise. It cannot be said to
be the cause, but this unnatural condition contrib-
utes to it by intensifying and perpetuating a state
of international tension. For that reason, our
enlightened self-interest as well as our sympathy
for the German people demands the restoration of
German unity. And we shall continue our
search — happily a joint search conducted with the
Federal Republic and our other allies of Western
Europe — for a solution.
We are convinced that, as the division of Ger-
many is an element in the worldwide dilemma and
not an isolated problem, it may well be that the
solution may be found in relationship to the world
situation rather than in isolation. We all realize
that there is a universal desire to ease tensions
and for an enduring peace. As the President has
promised, we will bend our efforts to the attain-
ment of these objectives. Nevertheless, we reject
utterly any formula advanced for the relaxation of
tensions that depends upon a perpetuation of ex-
isting injustices and dangers, including the divi-
sion of Germany. Conversely, we hold that neither
the reunification of Germany nor the resolution
of any other outstanding question should or could
be achieved at the expense of Western unity and
strength. Relaxation of tension does not mean
relaxation of vigilance or effort. On the contrary,
it means continuing strain until we know for cer-
tain whether present Soviet maneuvers signify a
change of objectives or merely a change of tactics.
As for the future — prophecy is always a thank-
less undertaking. There are certainly solid rea-
sons for the expectation that the Federal Republic
of Germany will remain a devoted partner and
ally. That expectation is based on the facts of
Germany's postwar record, on the aspirations of
the German people, and on the caliber of postwar
Germany's leadership. We have every reason to
believe that, given a fair chance, Germany's prog-
ress guided by the Chancellor's wise policy of
political and economic gradualism will continue,
to the benefit of the German people as well as the
free world.
No discussion these days seems to be fashionable
without a reference to the coming "summit" con-
ference in Geneva. Its area of interest is, of
course, important and comprehensive. There is a
desire to avoid a rigid formal agenda. No doubt,
a number of controversial subjects will come up for
discussion. It would be surprising if the prob-
lem of Germany were not among them.
The coming conference we hope will provide a
means of testing how substantial the apparent
48
Department of State Bulletin
recent changes of attitude of the Russians may be.
The conference may reveal and clarify the inten-
tions of the Soviets even though the discussions
will be limited to exploration of ways and means
of identifying and then later tackling the prob-
lems. This may call for a lengthy series of meet-
ings at different levels over an extended period of
time.
As for us and our allies, well, with Western
unity a reality instead of a hope, we face the
Soviets at Geneva from a more comfortable and
advantageous position of strength. We can af-
ford to be patient as well as determined. We
have learned to be cautious in these matters. It
would be exceedingly witless of us after all these
years of experience to let ourselves be trapped
into unrealistic expectations or stampeded into
unconsidered conclusions or actions.
You may recall an exceedingly interesting com-
ment made by Chancellor Adenauer at Harvard
last week. There is food for thought in it. "I
think," said our distinguished visitor, "that the
West should keep in mind one thing above all
others at the approaching conferences: For the
people of the West time is important and therefore
they are impatient and they press for an immediate
and visible success. Time means nothing to the
Russians; they are interested only in space and
not in time. In this they have a definite advan-
tage in negotiations which by their very nature are
most complicated. In my opinion, the West can-
not have too much patience."
This is wise counsel. We shall heed it. And
may I say that it is comforting to have associates
like Chancellor Adenauer whose statesmanship
will be a major factor in cementing our new alli-
ance with the Federal Republic of Germany.
Delegation to Heads of Government
Meeting at Geneva
The White House on July 1 announced the fol-
lowing delegation to the four-power conference of
Heads of Government at Geneva July 18.
The President
The Secretary of State
Dillon Anderson, Special Assistant to the President
Charles E. Bohlen, U.S. Ambassador to the Soviet Union
Robert R. Bowie, Director, Policy Planning Staff, Depart-
ment of State
James C. Hagerty, Press Secretary to the President
Douglas MacArthur II, Counselor, Department of State
Livingston T. Merchant, Assistant Secretary of State for
European Affairs
Herman Phleger, Legal Adviser, Department of State
Llewellyn E. Thompson, U.S. Ambassador to Austria
U.S., U.K., and France Hold
Talks With Yugoslavia
Following is the text of a joint communique
issued at Belgrade on June &7 following a series
of quadripartite talks:
Talks were held in Belgrade from June 24 to 27
between the Yugoslav Under Secretary of State
for Foreign Affairs, M. Prica, the Ambassadors
of the United States, the United Kingdom and
France on the general international situation and
questions of direct mutual concern.
These talks were a further step in a series of
consultations, individual, or collective, between
representatives of the three Western Governments
and the Yugoslav Government.
This exchange of views, which took place in an
atmosphere of cordiality and mutual confidence,
confirmed the wide measure of agreement among
the four Governments in their approach to the
various international questions under review.
This meeting had special significance in view
of the recent more favorable developments in the
international situation. The four Governments
were agreed that solutions to outstanding prob-
lems should be sought by peaceful means and by
negotiations based upon full respect for and recog-
nition of the right of all nations to independence,
equality, self-defense and collective security in
conformity with the Charter of the United Na-
tions. They will continue to promote such
solutions.
The four Governments express their firm con-
viction that the existence of a strong and inde-
pendent Yugoslavia and continued cooperation
between them under conditions of full equality are
a contribution to peace and stability. They con-
sider that the fruitful cooperation being developed
in all fields in the Balkan alliance is also an im-
portant contribution to peace and stability in this
part of the world.
They believe that this method of exchange of
views can help to promote an even closer under-
July II, 1955
49
standing between themselves and can also contrib-
ute to a further improvement in the general
international situation and to world peace. They
are confident that the good relations developed
between them in recent years in so many fields will
be maintained and further expanded.
Assessment of San Francisco Meeting
News Conference Statement by Secretary Dulles
Press release 393 dated June 28
I returned from a week in San Francisco which
was very useful. I reported on it fully last night
to the President. There were at San Francisco
Foreign Ministers from 37 countries, and I had
the opportunity of talking with many of them
about matters of common concern. Thus the
meeting not only served to renew the dedication
of the members to the principles of the United
Nations. It also served the charter purpose of
jjroviding a place for "harmonizing" the action
of the nations through high-level exchanges of
views.
The statements that were made by the Foreign
Ministers of Great Britain, France, and by myself
showed quite clearly the positions which we can
be expected to take at the Geneva Conference.
Also, the statement by Mr. Molotov indicated the
position which the Soviet Union will probably
take at that conference. There were a number of
private conversations which, so far as substance
was concerned, merely confirmed the positions
w T hich were taken publicly. We were able to
reach agreement upon all important procedural
points so that it can be expected that the Geneva
Conference will get under way promptly and
smoothly.
It is to be deplored that at this juncture, when
we are trying to consolidate peace, Soviet air
fighters seem to have been "trigger happy" in the
Bering Sea. So far, however, we doubt that that
represents a considered policy on the part of the
Soviet Union. Certainly we hope not. At least,
the Soviet Union has made an expression of regret
which is, I believe, the first time that it has pub-
licly indicated to us regret over the conduct of its
armed forces. It is, therefore, to be hoped that
the Geneva Conference can begin on the assump-
tion that all of the four participants genuinely
desire a secure peace.
50
Elections in Viet-Nam
Press release 396 dated June 28
At his news conference on June 28, Secretary
Dulles was asked the position of the United States
with respect to elections in Viet-Nam. The Sec-
retary replied:
Neither the United States Government nor the
Government of Viet-Nam is, of course, a party to
the Geneva armistice agreements. We did not
sign them, and the Government of Viet-Nam did
not sign them and, indeed, protested against them.
On the other hand, the United States believes,
broadly speaking, in the unification of countries
which have a historic unity, where the people are
akin. We also believe that, if there are conditions
of really free elections, there is no serious risk that
the Communists would win.
The Communists have never yet won any free
election. I don't think they ever will. Therefore,
we are not afraid at all of elections, provided they
are held under conditions of genuine freedom
which the Geneva armistice agreement calls for.
If those conditions can be provided we would be
in favor of elections, because we believe that they
would bring about the unification of the country
under free government auspices.
Visit of Prime Minister U Nu
Press release 397 dated June 28
At his news conference on June 28, Secretary
Dulles was asked whether he would discuss with
Prime Minister TJ Nu of Burma a relaxation of
tensions. The Secretary replied:
Yes, we no doubt will talk about that. We look
forward very much to this visit tomorrow of U Nu.
I had the pleasure of being the guest of his Gov-
ernment at Burma last March, and we had very
good talks at the time. I expect that this will give
us occasion to renew those talks. He has an inter-
esting point of view, and I am always happy to
have a chance of exchanffins; views with him.
Treatment of Far Eastern Questions
at Heads of Government Meeting
Press release 398 dated June 28
At his news conference on June 28, Secretary
Dulles was asked about the possibility of Far East-
Department of State Bulletin
em questions being raised at the Geneva Heads of
Government meeting. He replied:
The Soviets have indicated that they may make
certain proposals for a further conference at which
Far Eastern matters might be discussed, but I do
not think that, beyond that, the topic is likely to
come up.
Asked whether the Soviets had indicated whom
they would want at this further conference, the
Secretary replied:
Well, they have given some indications. They
at first indicated that they would probably renew
the proposal which they made at the Berlin con-
ference a year ago last January and February for
a five-power conference. They have since indi-
cated that they might suggest a somewhat larger
conference than the five-power conference.
Asked whether that would be an opportune time
to go back to the question of the reunification of
Korea, Secretary Dulles replied:
Well, we doubt very much whether that will be
a profitable subject for discussion at the Geneva
conference. Of course you know that the Geneva
conference is not designed in any event to reach
any substantive decisions but merely to set up
procedures for arriving at results which we both
find acceptable in principle. I do not think that
there is any reason to believe that a procedure
could now be found for unifying Korea which
would be any better, or which would be more apt
to succeed, than the effort which was made at
Geneva a year ago which failed.
Asked about the possibility of a further confer-
ence on the Far East, the Secretary said:
Well, I would be surprised, in the light of what
I now know, if it would be possible to agree upon
a future procedure. The views of the Soviet
Union and of ourselves seem to be quite far apart
in that respect.
Asked tohether that meant that he was not pre-
pared at this time to agree to a later Far East
conference which would include Communist
China, the Secretary replied:
Well, it would of course depend upon the com-
position of the conference. We have taken the
position, which in essence I reaffirmed in my
speech at San Francisco last Friday, that we are
not prepared to deal with the interests of countries
behind their back. Therefore any conference
which was designed to deal with the substantive
matters which concerned the Republic of China we
would not be prepared to deal with without its
participation. So far the suggestions which have
been made from the Communist side wholly ex-
clude any participation by the Republic of China.
Therefore, there seems to be an impasse on that
topic.
Asked about Mr. Molotov^s suggestion at his
San Francisco news conference that the United
States and Red China ought to have direct nego-
tiations, Secretary Dulles replied:
On the question of the direct talks between Com-
munist China and the United States, I have al-
ready indicated that there are certain matters
which we are prepared to talk about. There are
a good many people who are trying to be helpful
and trying to tell us how those talks can be con-
ducted, and we are accepting as much of that
information as we think is dependable and useful
and therefore have not yet come ourselves to the
point of having any such direct talks. But we do
not exclude them as a matter of principle.
// we accept the idea of direct talks with Com-
munist China, would that be interpreted by our
own Government and others, perhaps, as recogni-
tion of Red China, the Secretary was asked. He
replied:
It wouldn't involve recognition at all. We al-
ready have talked with them. We talked with
them at Panmunjom, we talked with them at
Geneva last year. As I have said many times,
you may have to recognize the fact of evil but
that doesn't mean that you clasp it to your bosom.
Where there are facts that you have to deal with
we don't close our eyes to those facts. Talks have
taken place and could take place without any
diplomatic recognition at all.
German Reunification
Press release 399 dated June 28
At his news conference on June 28, Secretary
Dulles was asked whether he would comment on
the stress laid by Foreign Minister Molotov at a
news conference at San Francisco on the fact that
the Soviet Union is willing to postpone or defer
July 7 7, 7955
51
the problem, of German reunification for some
indefinite period. The Secretary replied:
Well, it does seem as though the Soviet Union
has lost interest in the reunification of Germany.
It would seem, perhaps, that they talked about that
when they thought it might be good bait to try to
prevent the Republic of Germany from joining the
Nato and Western European Union, and now that
it ceases to serve as a bait for that purpose they
have no interest in it.
I would greatly deplore that loss of interest be-
cause, if there is a genuine desire to advance the
cause of peace and remove causes of international
friction, certainly there should be a desire to unify
Germany. The indefinite prolongation of that
separation of part of a great people from their
fellows is an evil. It is an evil which cannot be in-
definitely prolonged without, as I said at San
Francisco, leading to new evils and new trouble.
Therefore, any realistic effort to solve problems
which contain within them the seeds of injustice
and greater evil must include the problem of the
reunification of Germany.
Bering Sea Plane Incident
Press release 400 dated June 28
At his news conference on June 28, Secretary
Dulles was asked a series of questions relating to
the shooting down of a U. S. naval plane in the
Bering Sea on June 23 by Soviet MIGs. The first
question related to the amount of damage suffered
by the United States. The Secretary said:
I can't give you that in figures. The plane itself
was a total loss, and there are injuries to some of
the crew. But how to evaluate that in terms of
dollars, I don't know yet.
Asked whether the U.S. position is that the
Soviet Union should pay the full amount of the
damage, Secretary Dulles replied:
That is what we asked, yes.
Asked how far the scene of this shooting was
from the respective air frontiers of the United
States and the Soviet Union, the Secretary replied:
Well we think we know exactly. There is al-
ways a slight possibility of error within limited
margins. But it seems quite clear that the air-
plane was not within the air frontier of the Soviet
Union, even by their own definition. They claim
air space 12 miles out from the mainland. We do
not accept that thesis, but even on that theory it
would seem that the plane was outside of even
their 12-mile limit.
How much outside, the Secretary was asked.
He replied:
An appreciable amount. Of course the channel
there between St. Lawrence Island and the Soviet
mainland is itself only about 50 miles wide, so
that the middle of the channel is about 25 miles
from each side. So you are operating there with
fairly narrow margins.
Asked whether the United States will continue
to request full payment and reparations for the
crew, the Secretary replied:
There has been no decision yet reached on that
point. I discussed the matter with the President
last night. There are some further facts which
we are seeking to gather and probably no decision
will be made until the matter has been further
considered within the next day or two.
Asked how close the Russian plane, that did the
shooting was to our frontier, Secretary Dulles
said:
Well, our estimate is that the plane was slightly
to the west of the middle of the channel.
Are we asking that the Russian flyers be pun-
ished in any way for this, the Secretary was asked.
He replied:
I asked of Mr. Molotov that appropriate action
be taken in the event that it was clear that there
had been a violation — a willful violation — by the
Soviet flyers of the principle of international law.
Asked where the Russian planes came from, the
Secretary replied:
They apparently came from the Soviet main-
land, almost directly opposite St. Lawrence
Island.
Asked if he could elaborate on the slight possi-
bility of error, the Secretary replied:
All I mean is that there are no instruments
which enable you to be absolutely sure as to pre-
cisely where you are. There is a slight margin of
error always present in these facilities for loca-
tion. But we are as certain as it is humanly pos-
sible to be that the plane was not within the Soviet
air zone, even by their own definition.
52
Department of State Bulletin
Iloto high was this aircraft when it was at-
tacked, the Secretary was asked. He said :
It was about 10,000 feet.
Asked whether he thought Mr. Molotov was sur-
prised when he heard about this event or expressed
surprise, the Secretary replied:
He gave every indication of being surprised, yes.
Asked whether he had any information that
Soviet fighter pilots have been operating in the
Formosa Straits, Secretary Dulles replied that he
did not.
Asked whether he ruled out the possibility that
the shooting was done deliberately because they
were perhaps on the trail of something the Rus-
sians did not want them to see, the Secretary
replied:
They were not on the trail, in fact, of anything.
This flight was a routine flight which has been
made, I think, approximately a hundred times
within the last year. It's a flight which is nor-
mally made about twice a week, and the course of
the plane is the same each time, subject to minor
deviations due to atmospheric conditions. It is a
flight which starts at Kodiak, goes up north,
swings around, and comes back into Kodiak. It's
a plane which makes that flight for the purpose of
observing vessels in distress and things of that
sort. That has no relationship of any kind to any
military activity, and, as I say, it's a routine flight.
It's like a milk train — you can count on it almost
as being in that particular area at a certain time
twice a week.
European Security System
Press release 401 dated June 28
At his news conference on June 28, Secretary
Dulles toas asked what, in the light of his conver-
sations at San Francisco, toas his understanding of
the meaning of the phrase "European security sys-
tem." He replied:
Well, there has been developed under the Nato
and Western European Union a system which is
designed to give security for at least Western
Europe in terms of controlling the degree of con-
tinental armaments which will be permissible to
the continental members of that organization, so
as to be sure that while there is enough for defense
there will not be enough for aggression. There
has been worked out there the first effective sys-
tem — I believe it will be effective — of multilateral
land armaments control that the world has ever
known. That marks a great advance.
If it were feasible to have a system of limitation
and controls applicable to the Eastern countries,
that would be a further advance. Now, that is my
idea of a European security system. I'm not sure
that that is the same idea that the Soviet Union
has.
Would it go further into a system of nonaggres-
sion agreements between the Eastern and Western
blocs, or does it depend solely on armaments, the
Secretary toas asked. He replied:
My view about this nonaggression business is
that all of us are either parties to or committed
to the nonaggression principle of the United Na-
tions Charter. It is provided there that none of
the members will use force or the threat of force
in its international relations. And while the Fed-
eral Eepublic of Germany, because of the Soviet
opposition, is not itself a member of the United
Nations, it has agreed to abide by that principle.
Furthermore, we are bound by the United Na-
tions Charter to seek that those principles will
be applied to nonmember states. So you have
a nonaggression agreement in as formal and ex-
plicit a way as you can have it.
The problem is, are you going to, or can you,
trust nations to abide by that and can you imple-
ment that provision so as to make it less likely
that nations will be able to violate it if they have
the desire to do so? I think that something can
be done to implement further that principle. But
I do not see that it adds anything to pile promises
on promises. If nations are faithful to their
promises, there is already a nonaggression provi-
sion which is broad in scope and specific in its
terms. I would not think that any of us would
feel any safer if countries agreed to do what they
have already agreed to do.
Asked what he thought the Soviet concept of
European security was, the Secretary replied:
Well, we know what that is because that plan
was produced by Mr. Molotov at the Berlin con-
ference a year ago last January. 1 He had his
European security plan, which in effect involved a
1 Bulletin of Feb. 22, 1954, p. 269.
July 11, 1955
53
liquidation of Nato and the creation of a single
regional security system covering all of Europe.
Now that, as I pointed out at the time to him,
is completely unacceptable to the United States;
and, as the French and the British pointed
out, it was unacceptable to them, because you can-
not base a real security system through a joining
of forces with those whom you don't trust.
I pointed out in my speech at San Francisco
the fact that these collective security systems have
grown up under the authorization of the charter
as between nations which trusted each other.
They are needed because there is not trust as be-
tween all nations. You cannot practically have
the joining of forces for collective security as be-
tween nations which do not trust each other.
There are nations which believe in undermining
the governments of others, nations which believe
in reducing to a state of captivity other nations
which have had a long record of independent
existence. A joining of forces with nations who
believe and act that way does not add to anybody's
security at all. That is a fraud. Therefore, that
kind of security system is not acceptable. It is
designed to destroy a system which is effective, in
which people do place confidence, and replace it by
a system in which no confidence could be placed.
Asked whether he was hopeful that an agree-
ment can be reached for a sort of balance of forces
which would diminish the possibility of war, the
Secretary replied:
I consider that that is a possibility ; not a possi-
bility, obviously, to be realized at Geneva, because
it is an extremely complicated subject and there
are infinite varieties of formulae which might be
applied. There are many permutations and com-
binations which would all have to be explored.
But if there is a desire to reduce the burden of
armament, particularly as regards Europe, pend-
ing the possibility of reduction on a global basis,
then I think the prospect is not entirely without
hope.
Asked which he thought should come first in the
discussions at Geneva, a European security system
or the reunification of Germany, the Secretary
replied:
I think it is very difficult to deal with the one
wholly apart from the other. I would think that
both lines ought to be explored more or less at
the same time.
Ashed whether his doubts of the Russian in-
terest in unifying Germany could be interpreted
as meaning he doubted that the Russians really
want a relaxation of tensions and frictions, Mr.
Dulles replied:
I mean to imply that, unless they are prepared
to discuss such a problem as the reunification of
Germany, that, in my opinion, would throw doubt
upon the sincerity of their desire to remove causes
of tension.
Data on Atomic Radiation
O.S./U.N. press release 2179 dated June 22
The following statement was issued at San
Francisco on June 21 by Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr.,
U. S. Representative to the United Nations :
Although the best scientific information known
to us shows that properly safeguarded nuclear
testing, in contrast with nuclear warfare, is not
a threat to human health, there has been concern
in several parts of the world over the problem of
radiation from atomic tests and of its effect upon
human health and safety. There is already a
large body of scientific data in existence relating
to this question and we in the United States are
making intensive studies of it.
These studies must and will continue.
But the data which already exist and which will
become available in the future, both in the United
States of America and in other countries, have not
been collated. We, therefore, propose that these
data from all countries should be assembled, so
that all nations can be satisfied that humanity is
not endangered by these tests.
We believe that the United Nations can perform
an important service in undertaking to bring this
about. The best place to assemble all available
information is the United Nations. We think
that the next General Assembly should establish
a procedure to receive and assemble radiological
information collected by the various states, as well
as the results of national studies of radiation ef-
fects on human health and safety.
The collation by the United Nations of scientific
reports and data on radiation levels could set at
rest unjustified fears, combat sensational distor-
tion in the light of truth, and lead to humanity's
learning how to deal best with the problems of
atomic radiation.
54
Department of State Bulletin
Atoms-for-Peace Agreement With Turkey
On May 3 the White House announced the ap-
proval of the following proposed agreement be-
tween the Governments of the Republic of Turkey
and the United States for cooperation in the field
of research in the peaceful uses of atomic energy}
This is the first agreement of its hind proposed
under the provisions of the Atomic Energy Act of
1954 (Public Laic 70S, 83d Cong.).
Agreement for Cooperation Concerning Civil Uses of
Atomic Energy Between the Government of the
United States of America and the Government of
the Turkish Republic
Whereas the peaceful uses of atomic energy
hold great promise for all mankind; and
Whereas the Government of the United States
of America and the Government of the Turkish
Republic desire to cooperate with each other in
the development of such peaceful uses of atomic
energy; and
Whereas there is well advanced the design and
development of several types of research reactors
(as defined in Article X of this Agreement) ; and
Whereas research reactors are useful in the pro-
duction of research quantities of radioisotopes, in
medical therapy and in numerous other research
activities and at the same time are a means of
1 Bulletin of May 23, 1955, p. 865. For an announce-
ment of the initialing of nine other agreements for coopera-
tion, see ibid., June 20, 1955, p. 1018. Further atoms-for-
peace agreements have since been initialed with the fol-
lowing countries : on June 14 with Venezuela (press re-
lease 350), Portugal (press release 351), the Netherlands
(press release 352), the Philippines (press release 353),
and China (press release 354) ; on June 15 with Pakistan
(press release 356) ; on June 20 with Chile (press release
371) ; on June 21 with Japan (press release 376) ; on
June 22 with Greece (press release 379) ; on June 24 with
Uruguay (press release 382) ; and on July 1 with Sweden
(press release 412), Peru (press release 414), and Korea
(press release 416). More extensive agreements were
signed on June 15 with Belgium, Canada, and the United
Kingdom. See p. 58.
affording valuable training and experience in
nuclear science and engineering useful in the de-
velopment of other peaceful uses of atomic
energy including civilian nuclear power ; and
Whereas the Government of the Turkish Re-
public desires to pursue a research and develop-
ment program looking toward the realization of
the peaceful and humanitarian uses of atomic en-
ergy and desires to obtain assistance from the Gov-
ernment of the United States of America and
United States industry with respect to this pro-
gram; and
Whereas the Government of the United States
of America, represented by the United States
Atomic Energy Commission (hereinafter referred
to as the "Commission"), desires to assist the
Government of the Turkish Republic in such a
program ;
The Parties therefore agree as follows :
Article I
Subject to the limitations of Article V, the par-
ties hereto will exchange information in the fol-
lowing fields :
A. Design, construction and operation of re-
search reactors and their use as research, devel-
opment, and engineering tools and in medical
therapy.
B. Health and safety problems related to the
operation and use of research reactors.
C. The use of radioactive isotopes in physical
and biological research, medical therapy, agri-
culture, and industry.
Article II
A. The Commission will lease to the Govern-
ment of the Turkish Republic uranium enriched
in the isotope U-235, subject to the terms and con-
ditions provided herein, as may be required as in-
itial and replacement fuel in the operation of re-
search reactors which the Government of the
Turkish Republic, in consultation with the Com-
Jo/y 7 7, 7955
55
mission, decides to construct and as required in
agreed experiments related thereto. Also, the
Commission will lease to the Government of the
Turkish Eepublic uranium enriched in the isotope
U-235, subject to the terms and conditions pro-
vided herein, as may be required as initial and re-
placement fuel in the operation of such research
reactors as the Government of the Turkish Ee-
public may, in consultation with the Commission,
decide to authorize private individuals or private
organizations under its jurisdiction to construct
and operate, provided the Government of the
Turkish Eepublic shall at all times maintain suffi-
cient control of the material and the operation of
the reactor to enable the Government of the Turk-
ish Eepublic to comply with the provisions of this
Agreement and the applicable provisions of the
lease arrangement.
B. The quantity of uranium enriched in the
isotope U-235 transferred by the Commission into
the custody of the Government of the Turkish Ee-
public shall not at any time be in excess of six
(6) kilograms of contained U-235 in uranium en-
riched up to a maximum of twenty percent (20%)
U-235, unless the Commission shall specify that
a greater quantity of such material may be trans-
ferred under this Agreement to the Government of
the Turkish Eepublic or authorized persons under
its jurisdiction.
C. When any fuel elements containing U-235
leased by the Commission require replacement,
they shall be returned to the Commission, and ex-
cept as may be agreed, the f orm and content of the
irradiated fuel elements shall not be altered after
their removal from the reactor and prior to de-
livery to the Commission.
D. The lease of uranium enriched in the isotope
U-235 under this Article shall be on such terms and
conditions as may be mutually agreed and under
the conditions stated in Articles VI and VII.
Article III
Subject to the availability of supply and as may
be mutually agreed, the Commission will sell or
lease through such means as it deems appropriate,
to the Government of the Turkish Eepublic or au-
thorized persons under its jurisdiction such reactor
materials, other than special nuclear materials, as
are not obtainable on the commercial market and
which are required in the construction and opera-
tion of research reactors in Turkey. The sale or
lease of these materials shall be on such terms as
may be agreed.
Article IV
It is contemplated that, as provided in this Ar-
ticle, private individuals and private organiza-
tions in either the United States or Turkey may
deal directly with private individuals and private
organizations in the other country. Accordingly,
with respect to the subjects of agreed exchange of
information as provided in Article I, the Govern-
ment of the United States will permit persons
under its jurisdiction to transfer and export ma-
terials, including equipment and devices, to, and
perform services for, the Government of the Turk-
ish Eepublic and such persons under its jurisdic-
tion as are authorized by the Government of the
Turkish Eepublic to receive and possess such ma-
terials and utilize such services, subject to:
A. Limitations in Article V.
B. Applicable laws, regulations and license re-
quirements of the Government of the United
States, and the Government of the Turkish
Eepublic.
Article V
Eestricted Data shall not be communicated
under this Agreement and no materials or equip-
ment and devices shall be transferred and no serv-
ices shall be furnished under this Agreement to
the Government of the Turkish Eepublic or au-
thorized persons under its jurisdiction if the
transfer of any such materials or equipment and
devices or the furnishing of any such services in-
volves the communication of Eestricted Data.
Article VI
A. The Government of the Turkish Eepublic
agrees to maintain such safeguards as are neces-
sary to assure that the uranium enriched in the
isotope U-235 leased from the Commission shall
be used solely for the purposes agreed in accord-
ance with this Agreement and to assure the safe-
keeping of this material.
B. The Government of the Turkish Eepublic
agrees to maintain such safeguards as are neces-
sary to assure that all other reactor materials,
including equipment and devices, purchased in the
United States of America under this Agreement
by the Government of the Turkish Eepublic or
authorized persons under its jurisdiction, shall be
56
Department of State Bulletin
used solely for the design, construction, and opera-
tion of research reactors which the Government
of the Turkish Eepublic decides to construct and
operate and for research in connection therewith,
except as may otherwise be agreed.
C. In regard to research reactors constructed
pursuant to this Agreement the Government of
the Turkish Eepublic agrees to maintain records
relating to power levels of operation and burnup
of reactor fuels and to make annual reports to the
Commission on these subjects. If the Commission
requests, the Government of the Turkish Eepublic
will permit Commission representatives to observe
from time to time the condition and use of any
leased material and to observe the performance of
the reactor in which the material is used.
Article VII
Guaranties Prescribed by the U. S.
Atomic Energy Act of 195 It-
The Government of the Turkish Eepublic guar-
anties that :
A. Safeguards provided in Article VI shall be
maintained.
B. No material, including equipment and de-
vices, transferred to the Government of the Turk-
ish Eepublic or authorized persons under its juris-
diction, pursuant to this Agreement, by lease, sale,
or otherwise will be used for atomic weapons or
for research on or development of atomic weapons
or for any other military purposes, and that no
such material, including equipment and devices,
will be transferred to unauthorized persons or
beyond the jurisdiction of the Government of
the Turkish Eepublic except as the Commission
may agree to such transfer to another nation and
then only if in the opinion of the Commission such
transfer falls within the scope of an agreement
for cooperation between the United States and
the other nation.
Article VIII
This Agreement shall enter into force on June
10, 1955 and remain in force until June 9, 1965,
inclusively, and shall be subject to renewal as may
be mutually agreed.
At the expiration of this Agreement or any ex-
tension thereof the Government of the Turkish
Eepublic shall deliver to the United States all
fuel elements containing reactor fuels leased by
July 7 7, 7955
350550 — 55 3
the Commission and any other fuel material leased
by the Commission. Such fuel elements and such
fuel materials shall be delivered to the Commis-
sion at a site in the United States designated by
the Commission at the expense of the Govern-
ment of the Turkish Eepublic, and such delivery
shall be made under appropriate safeguards
against radiation hazards while in transit.
Article IX
It is the hope and expectation of the parties
that this initial Agreement for Cooperation will
lead to consideration of further cooperation ex-
tending to the design, construction, and operation
of power producing reactors. Accordingly, the
parties will consult with each other irom time to
time concerning the feasibility of an additional
agreement for cooperation with respect to the
f)roduction of power from atomic energy in
Turkey.
Article X
For purposes of this Agreement :
A. "Commission" means the United States
Atomic Energy Commission or its duly authorized
representatives.
B. "Equipment and devices" means any instru-
ment or apparatus, and includes research reactors,
as defined herein, and their component parts.
C. "Eesearch reactor" means a reactor which is
designed for the production of neutrons and other
radiations for general research and development
purposes, medical therapy, or training in nuclear
science and engineering. The term does not cover
power reactors, power demonstration reactors, or
reactors designed primarily for the production of
special nuclear materials.
D. The terms "Eestricted Data", "atomic wea-
pon", and "special nuclear material" are used in
this Agreement as defined in the United States
Atomic Energy Act of 1954.
In witness whereof, the parties hereto have
caused this Agreement to be executed pursuant
to duly constituted authority.
Done at Washington in duplicate this tenth
day of June, 1955.
For the Government of the United States of
America :
Geo. V. Allen
Assistant Secretary of State for Near
Eastern, South Asian, and African Affairs
57
WlLLARD F. LlBBT
Commissioner, United States
Atomic Energy Commission
For the Government of the Turkish Republic :
Melih Esenbel
Deputy Secretary General of the
Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Agreements With Belgium, Canada,
U.K. on Civil Uses of Atomic Energy
WHITE HOUSE ANNOUNCEMENT
White House press release dated June 15
The President on June 15 approved three pro-
posed bilateral agreements for cooperation con-
cerning the civil uses of atomic energy between
the Government of the United States and the
Governments of Belgium, Canada, and the United
Kingdom.
The proposed agreements were signed at a
White House ceremony. The Ambassador of Bel-
gium, Baron Silvercruys, signed for his Govern-
ment. For Canada the signers were Ambassador
A. D. P. Heeney and W. J. Bennett, President
of Atomic Energy of Canada, Ltd. and of El
Dorado Mining and Refining Ltd., who came from
Ottawa for the occasion. Sir Robert Scott, the
British Minister, signed for the United Kingdom.
Chairman Lewis L. Strauss of the Atomic Energy
Commission and Robert Murphy, Deputy Under
Secretary of State, signed each of the three agree-
ments for the United States.
Chairman Strauss presented to the President
the Commission's formal recommendation that he
approve each of the proposed agreements as one
that would promote the defense and security of
the United States. The President then signed
letters of approval. As required by the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954, the proposed agreements will
be submitted by the Atomic Energy Commission
to the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy of the
Congress.
Following this submission, and the tabling of
the agreements in the Parliaments of other sig-
natories, the texts of the documents will be issued
in Brussels, Ottawa, London, and Washington. 1
1 Texts were released by the U.S. Atomic Energy Com-
mission on June 20.
Each agreement provides for mutual coopera-
tion between the Governments in classified and
unclassified research leading to the development
of peaceful uses for atomic energy, including the
generation of power. The principles to govern
and effectuate this cooperation are stated.
Each agreement calls for exchange of classified
and unclassified information relating to the ap-
plication of atomic energy to peaceful uses (but
excluding exchange of information on military
application), for exchange of research materials
not available commercially, for the use of research
and testing facilities, and for the transfer of
equipment and devices — all under prudent safe-
guards. Each agreement provides that opportu-
nity be opened for participation by industrial
firms of the nations involved in the programs for
developing peaceful uses of atomic energy.
STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT
White House press release dated June 15
I am happy to accept the recommendation of
the Atomic Energy Commission that approval be
given the proposed bilateral agreements for co-
operation concerning the civil uses of atomic en-
ergy signed today on behalf of the Government of
this Nation and the Governments of Belgium,
Canada, and the United Kingdom.
These proposed agreements are a logical exten-
sion of the previous active partnership between
these nations and the United States for the devel-
opment of atomic energy. The United Kingdom
and Canada supplied knowledge and skill and
manpower to play a full and fruitful part in the
wartime joint effort which culminated in the first
release of atomic energy. Belgium and Canada
have provided uranium, the basic raw material
for the wartime and the postwar atomic energy
programs. All three have freely cooperated to
further our common defense and security,
strengthen the bulwarks of the free world, and
help to open the way into the development of
peaceful uses of the atom which holds forth so
much promise and hope for betterment of human
living and easing of international tensions.
Now, acting under the authorizations of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, we are privileged to
enter into bilateral agreements which enlarge that
promise and brighten that hope. The wisdom of
the Congress in making this possible is exempli-
58
Department of Stale Bulletin
fied by these proposed agreements. They lengthen
the reach of cooperation among us looking toward
the civil uses of atomic energy.
The pace of progress toward the goal of the
atoms-for-peace program is accelerating. Im-
portant events are just ahead, such as the Inter-
national Conference on Peaceful Uses of Atomic
Energy at Geneva in August.
Again on this occasion, as many times earlier,
I pledge the unremitting cooperation of this Na-
tion to realize the benefits of atomic energy as a
measure to promote lasting peace.
Atomic Agreements for Mutual
Defense With Canada and U.K.
On June 15 (press release 358) x the Department
of State announced that representatives of the
Government of the United States and the Govern-
ment of Canada and representatives of the Gov-
ernment of the United States and the Government
of the United Kingdom had reached agreement on
the terms of proposed agreements for the exchange
of atomic information for mutual defense
purposes.
On June 20 (press releases 369 and 370) the
Department released the texts of both agreements,
including letters from Secretary of Defense
Wilson, recommending to the President that he
approve the agreements and letters of transmittal
from the President to Senator Clinton P. Ander-
son, Chairman of the Joint Committee on Atomic
Energy.
AGREEMENT WITH CANADA
Letter From Secretary Wilson to the President
June 10, 1955
Dear Mr. President: Section 144 b. of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954 empowers you to au-
thorize the Department of Defense, with the as-
sistance of the Atomic Energy Commission, to
cooperate with another nation or regional defense
organization to which the United States is a party
and to communicate to that nation or organiza-
tion such atomic information as is necessary to the
development of defense plans, the training of per-
sonnel in the employment of and defense against
1 Not printed.
atomic weapons, and the evaluation of the capa-
bilities of potential enemies in the employment
of atomic weapons. This cooperation and com-
munication, however, may be undertaken only in
accordance with the limitations imposed by the
Act and under an agreement entered into pursuant
to Section 123 thereof.
The first of these agreements was with the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization. 2 It was approved
by you on April 13, 1955, and has been before the
Joint Committee on Atomic Energy for the re-
quired thirty-day period. With the cooperation of
the Department of State, a separate agreement has
now been negotiated with Canada and recom-
mended for signature. This proposed agreement
is submitted herewith for your approval.
It is the view of this Department that this agree-
ment is entirely in accord with the provisions of
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. The execution of
this agreement should do much to advance our
mutual defense interests, especially the vital cause
of North American defense in which we have long
been working closely with our Canadian neighbors,
and will thereby aid materially in the defense of
the United States. I therefore strongly recom-
mend that you approve this proposed agreement
as required by Section 123 of the Atomic Energy
Act and transmit the agreement to the Joint Com-
mittee on Atomic Energy together with your de-
terminations and authorizations as to execution.
With great respect, I am
Faithfully yours,
C. E. Wilson
Letter From the President to Senator Anderson
June 15, 1955
Dear Senator Anderson : Pursuant to Section
123 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, I hereby
submit to the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy
a proposed agreement between the Governments of
the United States and Canada for cooperation re-
garding communication of atomic information for
mutual defense purposes under Section 144 b. of
the Act.
Under the terms of the proposed agreement,
the United States may exchange with Canada, so
long as Canada pursuant to an international ar-
rangement continues to make substantial and ma-
terial contributions to the mutual defense effort,
2 Bulletin of Apr. 25, 1955, p. 686.
July 71, J 955
59
atomic information which the United States con-
siders necessary to
( 1 ) the development of defense plans ;
(2) the training of personnel in the employ-
ment of and defense against atomic weap-
ons; and
(3) the evaluation of the capabilities of poten-
tial enemies in the employment of atomic
weapons.
Canada will make atomic information available
to the United States on the same basis.
Atomic information made available pursuant
to the proposed agreement will not be transferred
to unauthorized persons, or beyond the jurisdic-
tion of the recipient government except where that
information is to be communicated to another na-
tion or regional organization which has already
been given the same information under an agree-
ment similar to this and then only to the extent
such transfer is specifically authorized by the orig-
inating government.
Transfers of atomic information by the United
States under the proposed agreement will be made
only in accordance with the Atomic Energy Act
of 1954 and such information will be safeguarded
by the stringent security arrangements in effect
between the United States and Canada when this
agreement comes into force.
The agreement will remain in effect until ter-
minated by agreement between the two govern-
ments, but the actual exchange of atomic infor-
mation is entirely discretionary.
The Department of Defense has strongly rec-
ommended approval of this agreement. It is my
firm conviction that through the cooperative meas-
ures foreseen in this agreement we will have aided
materially not only in strengthening our own de-
fenses but also those of our Canadian ally and
will thereby contribute greatly to the mutual de-
fense efforts which are of such vital importance
to the maintenance of our common freedom.
Accordingly, I hereby determine that the per-
formance of this proposed agreement will pro-
mote, and will not constitute an unreasonable risk
to, the common defense and security, and approve
this agreement. In addition, I hereby authorize,
subject to the provisions of the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954, the Secretary of State to execute the
proposed agreement and the Department of De-
fense, with the assistance of the Atomic Energy
Commission, to cooperate with Canada and to
communicate Restricted Data to Canada under
the agreement.
Sincerely,
Dwight D. Eisenhower
Agreement Between the Government of the United
States of America and the Government of Canada for
Cooperation Regarding Atomic Information for
Mutual Defense Purposes
The Government of the United States of Amer-
ica and the Government of Canada,
Recognizing that their mutual security and de-
fense requires that they be prepared to meet the
contingencies of atomic warfare,
Recognizing that their common interests will
be advanced by the exchange of information per-
tinent thereto,
Believing that the exchange of such information
can be undertaken without threat to the security
of either country, and
Taking into consideration the United States
Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and the Canadian
Atomic Energy Control Act and Atomic Energy
Regulations, which were prepared with these pur-
poses in mind,
Agree as follows :
Article I
1. While the United States and Canada are par-
ticipating in international arrangements for their
mutual defense and security and making substan-
tial and material contribution thereto, each Gov-
ernment will from time to time make available to
the other Government atomic information which
the Government making such information avail-
able deems necessary to :
(a) the development of defense plans;
(b) the training of personnel in the employ-
ment of and defense against atomic weap-
ons; and
(c) the evaluation of the capabilities of poten-
tial enemies in the employment of atomic
weapons.
2. Atomic information which is transferred by
either Government pursuant to this Agreement
shall be used by the other Government exclusively
for the preparation and implementation of defense
plans in the mutual interests of the two countries.
60
Department of State Bulletin
Article II
1. All transfers of atomic information to Can-
ada by the United States pursuant to this Agree-
ment will be made in compliance with the provi-
sions of the United States Atomic Energy Act of
1954 and any subsequent applicable United States
legislation. All transfers of atomic information
to the United States by Canada pursuant to this
Agreement will be made in compliance with the
Atomic Energy Control Act and the Atomic En-
ergy Regulations of Canada or subsequent appli-
cable Canadian legislation and regulations.
2. Under this Agreement there will be no trans-
fers by the United States or Canada of atomic
weapons or special nuclear material, as these terms
are defined in Section 11 d. and Section 11 t. of
the United States Atomic Energy Act of 1954.
Article III
1. Atomic information made available pursuant
to this Agreement shall be accorded full security
protection under applicable security arrangements
between the United States and Canada and appli-
cable national legislation and regulations of the
two countries. In no case shall either Govern-
ment maintain security standards for safeguard-
ing atomic information made available pursuant
to this Agreement lower than those set forth in
the applicable security arrangements in effect on
the date this Agreement comes into force.
2. Atomic information which is exchanged pur-
suant to this Agreement will be made available
through channels existing or hereafter agreed for
the exchange of classified defense information be-
tween the two Governments.
3. Atomic information received pursuant to this
Agreement shall not be transferred by the recip-
ient Government to any unauthorized person or,
except as provided in Article V of this Agreement,
beyond the jurisdiction of that Government.
Each Government may stipulate the degree to
which any of the categories of information made
available to the other Government pursuant to
this Agreement may be disseminated, may specify
the categories of persons who may have access to
such information, and may impose such other re-
strictions on the dissemination of such informa-
tion as it deems necessary.
Article IV
As used in this Agreement, "atomic informa-
tion" means :
(a) so far as concerns the information provided
by the United States, Restricted Data, as
defined in Section 11 r. of the United States
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, which is per-
mitted to be communicated pursuant to the
provisions of Section 144 b. of that Act
and information relating primarily to the
military utilization of atomic weapons
which has been removed from the Re-
stricted Data category in accordance with
the provisions of Section 142 d. of the
United States Atomic Energy Act of 1954 ;
(b) so far as concerns the information provided
by Canada, classified information relating
to the military application of atomic
energy.
Article V
Nothing herein shall be interpreted or operate
as a bar or restriction to consultation and coopera-
tion by the United States or Canada with other
nations or regional organizations in any fields of
defense. Neither Government, however, shall
communicate atomic information made available
by the other Government pursuant to this Agree-
ment to any nation or regional organization unless
the same information has been made available to
that nation or regional organization by the other
Government in accordance with its own legislative
requirements and except to the extent that such
communication is expressly authorized by such
other Government.
Article VI
This Agreement shall enter into force on
the date of receipt by the Government of Canada
of a notification from the Government of the
United States of America that the period of thirty
days required by Section 123 c. of the U.S. Atomic
Energy Act of 1954 has elapsed, and shall remain
in effect until terminated by mutual agreement of
both Governments.
Done at Washington this fifteenth day of June
1955 in two original texts.
For the United States of America:
C. Burke Elbrick
For Canada :
A. D. P. Heenet
July 11, 1955
61
AGREEMENT WITH THE UNITED KINGDOM
Letter From Secretary Wilson to the President
June Hi 1955
Dear Mr. President: Section 144 b. of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954 empowers you to
authorize the Department of Defense, with the
assistance of the Atomic Energy Commission, to
cooperate with another nation or regional defense
organization to which the United States is a party
and to communicate to that nation or organization
such atomic information as is necessary to the
development of defense plans, the training of
personnel in the employment of and defense
against atomic weapons, and the evaluation of the
capabilities of potential enemies in the employ-
ment of atomic weapons. This cooperation and
communication, however, may be undertaken only
in accordance with the limitations imposed by
the Act and under an agreement entered into pur-
suant to Section 123 thereof.
The first of these agreements was with the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization. 3 It was approved
by you on April 13, 1955, and has been before the
Joint Committee on Atomic Energy for the re-
quired thirty-day period. With the cooperation
of the Department of State, a separate agreement
has now been negotiated with the United King-
dom and recommended for signature. This pro-
posed agreement is submitted herewith for your
approval.
It is the view of this Department that this
agreement is entirely in accord with the provision
of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. I am con-
vinced that it will fully serve the best interests of
the United States by making possible a further
significant extension of the close cooperation in
the field of mutual defense which has character-
ized our relationships with the United Kingdom
for so many years. I therefore strongly recom-
mend that you approve this proposed agreement
as required by Section 123 of the Atomic Energy
Act and transmit the agreement to the Joint
Committee on Atomic Energy together with your
determinations and authorizations as to execution.
With great respect, I am
Faithfully yours,
C. E. Wieson
1 Ibid., Apr. 25, 1955, p.
Letter From the President to Senator Anderson
June 15, 1955
Dear Senator Anderson : Pursuant to Section
123 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, I hereby
submit to the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy
a proposed agreement between the Governments of
the United States and the United Kingdom for
cooperation regarding communication of atomic
information for mutual defense purposes under
Section 144 b. of the Act.
Under the terms of the proposed agreement, the
United States may exchange with the United
Kingdom, so long as the United Kingdom pur-
suant to an international arrangement continues
to make substantial and material contributions to
the mutual defense effort, atomic information
which the United States considers necessary to
(1) the development of defense plans;
(2) the training of personnel in the employ-
ment of and defense against atomic weap-
ons; and
(3) the evaluation of the capabilities of poten-
tial enemies in the employment of atomic
weapons.
The United Kingdom will make atomic infor-
mation available to the United States on the same
basis.
Atomic information made available pursuant to
the proposed agreement will not be transferred
to unauthorized persons, or beyond the jurisdic-
tion of the recipient government except where that
information is to be communicated to another
nation or regional organization which has already
been given the same information under an agree-
ment similar to this and then only to the extent
such transfer is specifically authorized by the
originating government.
Transfers of atomic information by the United
States under the proposed agreement will be made
only in accordance with the Atomic Energy Act
of 1954 and such information will be safeguarded
by the stringent security arrangements in effect
between the United States and the United King-
dom when this agreement comes into force.
The agreement will remain in effect until termi-
nated by agreement between the two governments,
but the actual exchange of atomic information is
entirely discretionary.
The Department of Defense has strongly recom-
62
Department of State Bulletin
mended approval of this agreement. It is my
firm conviction that through the cooperative meas-
ures foreseen in this agreement we will have aided
materially not only in strengthening our own de-
fenses but also those of our British ally and will
thereby contribute greatly to the mutual defense
efforts which are of such vital importance to the
maintenance of our common freedom.
Accordingly, I hereby determine that the per-
formance of this proposed agreement will pro-
mote, and will not constitute an unreasonable risk
to, the common defense and security, and approve
this agreement. In addition, I hereby authorize
subject to the provisions of the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954, the Secretary of State to execute the
proposed agreement and the Department of De-
fense, with the assistance of the Atomic Energy
Commission, to cooperate with the United King-
dom and to communicate Restricted Data to the
United Kingdom under the agreement.
Sincerely,
Dwight D. Eisenhower
Agreement Between the Government of the United
States of America and the Government of the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland for
Cooperation Regarding Atomic Information for
Mutual Defense Purposes
The Government of the United States of Amer-
ica and the Government of the United Kingdom
of Great Britain and Northern Ireland,
Recognizing that their mutual security and de-
fense requires that they be prepared to meet the
contingencies of atomic warfare,
Recognizing that their common interests will
be advanced by the exchange of information per-
tinent thereto,
Believing that the exchange of such information
can be undertaken without threat to the security
of either country, and
Taking into consideration the United States
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, which was prepared
with these purposes in mind,
Agree as follows :
Article I
1. "While the United States and the United
Kingdom are participating in international ar-
rangements for their mutual defense and security
and making substantial and material contribution
thereto, each Govermnent will from time to time
make available to the other Government atomic
information which the Government making such
information available deems necessary to :
(a) the development of defense plans;
(b) the training of personnel in the employ-
ment of and defense against atomic
weapons; and
(c) the evaluation of the capabilities of po-
tential enemies in the employment of
atomic weapons.
2. Atomic information which is transferred by
either Government pursuant to this Agreement
shall be used by the other Government exclusively
for the preparation and implementation of de-
fense plans in the mutual interests of the two
countries.
Article II
1. All transfers of atomic information to the
United Kingdom by the United States pursuant
to this Agreement will be made in compliance with
the provisions of the United States Atomic
Energy Act of 1954 and any subsequent appli-
cable United States legislation. All transfers of
atomic information to the United States by the
United Kingdom pursuant to this Agreement will
be made in compliance with the United Kingdom
Official Secrets Acts, 1911-1939, and the United
Kingdom Atomic Energy Act of 1946.
2. Under this Agreement there will be no trans-
fers by the United States or the United Kingdom
of atomic weapons or special nuclear material,
as these terms are defined in Section 11 d. and
Section 11 1. of the United States Atomic Energy
Act of 1954.
Article III
1. Atomic information made available pursu-
ant to this Agreement shall be accorded full
security protection under applicable security
arrangements between the United States and the
United Kingdom and applicable national legis-
lation and regulations of the two countries. In
no case shall either Government maintain security
standards for safeguarding atomic information
made available pursuant to this Agreement lower
than those set forth in the applicable security
arrangements in effect on the date this Agreement
comes into force.
2. Atomic information which is exchanged pur-
July 11, 1955
63
suant to this Agreement will be made available
through channels existing or hereafter agreed for
the exchange of classified defense information be-
tween the two Governments.
3. Atomic information received pursuant to this
Agreement shall not be transferred by the recipi-
ent Government to any unauthorized person or,
except as provided in Article V of this Agree-
ment, beyond the jurisdiction of that Government.
Each Government may stipulate the degree to
which any of the categories of information made
available to the other Government pursuant to
this Agreement may be disseminated, may specify
the categories of persons who may have access to
such information, and may impose such other re-
strictions on the dissemination of such informa-
tion as it deems necessary.
Article IV
As used in this Agreement, "atomic informa-
tion" means :
(a) so far as concerns the information pro-
vided by the United States, Eestricted
Data, as denned in Section 11 r. of the
United States Atomic Energy Act of 1954,
which is permitted to be communicated pur-
suant to the provisions of Section 144 b. of
that Act, and information relating pri-
marily to the military utilization of atomic
weapons which has been removed from the
Restricted Data category in accordance
with the provisions of Section 142 d. of the
United States Atomic Energy Act of 1954;
(b) so far as concerns the information pro-
vided by the United Kingdom, information
exchanged under this Agreement which is
either classified atomic energy information
or other United Kingdom defense infor-
mation which it is decided to transfer to
the United States in pursuance of Article I
of this Agreement.
Article V
Nothing herein shall be interpreted or operate
as a bar or restriction to consultation and co-
operation by the United States or the United
Kingdom with other nations or regional organi-
zations in any fields of defense. Neither Govern-
ment, however, shall communicate atomic infor-
mation made available by the other Government
pursuant to this Agreement to any nation or
regional organization unless the same informa-
tion has been made available to that nation or
regional organization by the other Government
in accordance with its own legislative require-
ments and except to the extent that such communi-
cation is expressly authorized by such other
Government.
Article VI
This Agreement shall enter into force on the
date on which each Government shall receive from
the other Government written notification that
it has complied with all statutory and constitu-
tional requirements for the entry into force of such
an Agreement, and shall remain in effect until ter-
minated by mutual agreement of both Govern-
ments.
Done at Washington this Fifteenth day of June
1955 in two original texts.
For the United States of America :
C. Burke Elbrick
For the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Northern Ireland:
R. H. Scott
U.S. Delegations to
International Conferences
U.N. Conference on Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy
The White House announced on July 1 that the
President had approved the designations of the
following principal members of the U. S. delega-
tion to the United Nations Conference on the
Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy to be held at
Geneva, Switzerland, August 8-20, 1955 :
Chairman — Lewis L. Strauss, Chairman, U.S. Atomic
Energy Commission
Vice Chairman — Willard F. Libby, Chicago, 111., member,
U.S. Atomic Energy Commission
I. I. Rabi, New York, professor of physics, Columbia
University ; Chairman, General Advisory Committee to
the Atomic Energy Commission
Detlev W. Bronk, Media, Pa., president, National Academy
of Sciences : president, Rockefeller Institute for Medical
Research
Shields Warren, West Newton, Mass., Scientific Director,
Cancer Research Institute, New England Deaconess
Hospital, Boston, Mass. ; former director, Division of
Biology and Medicine, Atomic Energy Commission
64
Department of State Bulletin
Application for Proceedings Against U. S. S. R.
for Destruction of B 29 off Hokkaido in 1952
DEPARTMENT ANNOUNCEMENT
Press release 326 dated June 7
H. Freeman Matthews, U.S. Ambassador at The
Hague, on June 2, 1955, filed with the Interna-
tional Court of Justice an application by the U.S.
Government instituting proceedings against the
Soviet Government on account of the destruction
off Hokkaido, Japan, on October 7, 1952, of a U.S.
Air Force B-29 aircraft and the loss of its crew.
The Legal Adviser of the Department of State,
Herman Phleger, has been appointed agent of the
United States for these proceedings.
There were transmitted as annexes to the appli-
cation a copy of the formal diplomatic note de-
livered to the Soviet Government on September
25, 1954, in which the Soviet Government was
charged with liability for the incident in the
amount of $1,620,295.01 1 and a copy of the Soviet
Government's reply of December 30, 1954, disput-
ing its liability. In this regard the application
states that a dispute is therefore presented ap-
propriate for hearing and decision by the Interna-
tional Court of Justice in accordance with its
statute and rules.
Among the subjects in dispute are serious ques-
tions of international law. These include the
validity of the Soviet Government's claim to sov-
ereignty over the Habomai Islands situated off
Hokkaido, Japan. The U.S. Government sup-
ports the Japanese Government's denial of the
legal right of the Soviet Government to the
Habomai Islands.
In filing the present application, the U.S. Gov-
ernment is pursuing the policy of exhausting ev-
ery available legal means, including the presenta-
tion of claims in the International Court of
Justice, in order to bring an end to lawless attacks
upon U.S. military aircraft and their crews. This
1 Bulletin of Oct. 18, 1954, p. 579.
policy of the U.S. Government was announced by
ximbassador Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr., on Septem-
ber 10, 1954, in the Security Council of the United
Nations 2 in the course of the debate on a compara-
ble attack by Soviet fighters against a U.S. Navy
Neptune-type aircraft over the Sea of Japan on
September 4, 1954. On March 3, 1954, applica-
tions were filed against the Soviet and Hungarian
Governments on account of their treatment of four
American airmen who came down on Hungarian
soil in a U.S. Air Force C^7 aircraft. 3 On March
29, 1955, an application was filed against the
Czechoslovak Government on account of the de-
struction of a U.S. Air Force F-84 aircraft over
Germany. 4
TEXT OF APPLICATION TO INTERNATIONAL
COURT OF JUSTICE
Mat 26, 1955
Sir:
1. This is a written application, in accordance
with the Statute and Rules of the Court, submitted
by the Government of the United States of Amer-
ica instituting proceedings against the Govern-
ment of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
on account of certain willful acts committed by
fighter aircraft of the Soviet Government against
a United States Air Force B-29 aircraft and its
crew off Hokkaido, Japan, on October 7, 1952.
The subject of the dispute and a succinct state-
ment of the facts and grounds upon which the
claim of the Government of the United States of
America is based are adequately set forth in a note
delivered to the Soviet Government on September
25, 1954. A copy of the note is attached to this
'Ibid., Sept. 20, 1954, p. 417.
3 Ibid., Mar. 22, 1954, p. 44'J.
' Ibid., Apr. 18, 1955, p. 648.
July 7 7, 7 955
65
application as an annex. The Soviet Govern-
ment has asserted its contentions of fact and law
with reference to the United States Government's
claim in other diplomatic correspondence on this
subject, most recently in a note dated December
30, 1954, a copy of which is also attached to this
application as an annex.
2. The United States Government notes that the
present dispute concerns matters of the character
specified in Article 36 (2) of the Statute of the
Court, including subdivisions (a) through (d).
As will be seen from the annexes, the legal dispute
of the United States Government with the Soviet
Government involves serious questions of interna-
tional law. Among them are the validity of the
Soviet Government's claim to sovereignty over the
Habomai Islands situated off Hokkaido, Japan,
and in that connection the interpretation of the
Treaty of Peace with Japan signed at San Fran-
cisco on September 8, 1951. In addition there are
involved the scope and application of international
obligations relating to the overflight of intruding
and intercepting military aircraft, together with
numerous issues of fact which if resolved in favor
of the United States Government would constitute
breaches of international obligation by the Soviet
Government ; and the nature and extent of repara-
tions to be made by the Soviet Government to the
United States Government for all these breaches.
The United States Government, in filing this ap-
plication with the Court, submits to the Court's
jurisdiction for the purposes of this case. The
Soviet Government appears not to have filed any
declaration with the Court thus far, although it
was invited to do so by the United States Govern-
ment in the note annexed hereto. The Soviet
Government is, however, qualified to submit to the
jurisdiction of the Court in this matter and may
upon notification of this application by the Reg-
istrar, in accordance with the Rules of the Court,
take the necessary steps to enable the Court's juris-
diction over both parties to the dispute to be con-
firmed.
The United States Government thus founds the
jurisdiction of this Court on the foregoing con-
siderations and on Article 36 (1) of the Statute.
3. The claim of the Government of the United
States of America is briefly that the Government
of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on
October 7, 1952 willfully and unlawfully caused
fighter aircraft to overfly the territory of Japan,
to hover over and pace a United States Air Force
B-29 aircraft lawfully flying over Japan, the
Soviet aircraft doing so unbeknown to the crew
of the United States Air Force B-29, and without
any provocation to attack and destroy the United
States Air Force B-29, causing it to crash into the
sea at a point between Yuri Island and Akiyuri
Island in territory rightfully belonging to Japan ;
that the crew of eight, all members of the United
States Air Force and nationals of the United
States, have failed to return ; and that the Soviet
Government has concealed from the United
States Government information as to the fate of
the crew and has not made provision for the
prompt return of any crew members whom it may
still be holding or of whose whereabouts it is
informed. The damages suffered by the United
States Government and for which the Soviet
Government is liable to it are specified in the
annexed note. The United States Government
claims that in the circumstances described in the
annex the actions chargeable to the Soviet Gov-
ernment constituted serious violations of inter-
national obligation for which the United States
Government has demanded and demands mone-
tary and other reparation.
In diplomatic correspondence with reference to
this matter, including the Soviet Government's
note a copy of which is attached hereto as an
annex, constituting negotiations which must now
be determined to have been exhausted, the Soviet
Government has asserted a version of the facts
and of the law contrary to that asserted by the
United States Government.
A dispute is therefore presented appropriate
for hearing and decision by this Court in accord-
ance with the Statute and Rules.
The United States Government, in further
pleadings herein, will more fully set forth the
issues of fact and the issues of law in this dispute.
It will request that the Court find that the Soviet
Government is liable to the United States Gov-
ernment for the damages caused ; that the Court
award damages in favor of the United States
Government against the Soviet Government in
the sum of $1,620^95.01 with interest and such
other reparation and redress as the Court may
deem to be fit and proper ; and that the Court make
all other necessary orders and awards, including
an award of costs, to effectuate its determinations.
4. The undersigned has been appointed by the
66
Department of State Bulletin
Government of the United States of America as
its agent for the purpose of this application and
all proceedings thereon.
Very truly yours,
Herman Phleger
The Legal Adviser
of the
Department of State
The Registrar of the
International Court of Justice,
The Hague, Netherlands.
[Annex (1) : Text of U.S. Note of September 25, 1954,
to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.]
Annex (2)
(translation from Russian)
Text of Soviet Note of December 30, 1954 to the
United States
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
USSR
No. 114/OSA
In connection with the note of the Government of the
United States of America No. 270 of September 25 of
this year the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics considers it necessary to state the following.
Having examined the aforementioned note of the Gov-
ernment of the United States of America concerning the
incident, which took place in connection with the viola-
tion of the State boundary of the USSR by an American
B-29 bomber in the region of the island of Yuri on October
7, 1952, the Soviet Government notes that this note con-
tains essentially nothing new relating to the above-men-
tioned incident in comparison with that which the Gov-
ernment of the USA earlier reported on this question. In
the note of the Government of the USA a version of the
mentioned incident which is contrary to fact is again
repeated, unsubstantiated suppositions relative to the
fate of members of the crew of the aforementioned Amer-
ican airplane are stated, and also certain questions un-
related to the given affair are raised.
The Soviet Government in its notes of October 12 " and
November 24, 1952 6 has already set forth on the basis
of factual data the circumstances relating to the viola-
tion of the Soviet State boundary by an American mili-
tary airplane. Information, supplementary hereto, in
relation to the above-mentioned incident, is also con-
tained in an extract appended to this note from a report
of the circumstances of the violation of the State bound-
ary of the USSR in the region of the island of Yuri on
October 7, 1952 by an American B-29 airplane.
The circumstances of this incident set forth in the
mentioned notes of the Soviet Government and also in
the above-mentioned Report show that the American air-
'IMd., Oct. 27, 1952, p. 649.
8 Not printed.
plane on October 7, 1952 violated the State boundary of
the USSR in the region of the island of Yuri and opened
unprovoked fire on Soviet fighters guarding the State
boundary of the USSR.
The Soviet Government in a note of November 24, 1952
has already reported that it does not dispose of informa-
tion of the further fate of the American B-29 bomber
and its crew.
On the question touched upon in the note of the Gov-
ernment of the USA of State sovereignty over the South
Kurile islands the position of the Soviet Union has been
set forth in the notes of the Soviet Government to the
Government of the USA of November 24, 1952 and
December 11, 1954."
Since it has been precisely established that the Amer-
ican military airplane violated the boundary of the USSR
and without any reasons opened fire on the Soviet fighters
the responsibility for the incident which took place and
its consequences lies entirely on the American side. Un-
der these conditions the Soviet Government cannot take
into consideration the pretension contained in the note
of the Government of the USA of September 25 of this
year and considers without any foundation the proposal
of the Government of the USA for submitting this matter
for consideration by the International Court.
With regard to the attempts of the Government of the
USA to use the incident of October 7, 1952 in order to
present in a false light the position of the Soviet Union
with respect to Japan and the Japanese people, the Soviet
Government considers it necessary to note that the at-
titude of the Soviet Union toward Japan and the Japanese
people is well known.
The position of the Soviet Union, in particular, found
its reflection in the Joint Declaration of the Government
of the USSR and the Government of the CPR [Chinese
People's Republic] concerning relations with Japan of
October 12, 1954. In this Declaration it was noted that
although nine years have passed since the end of the
war, Japan has not received independence and continues
to remain in the position of a semi-occupied country. The
territory of Japan is covered with numerous American
military bases, the industry and finances of Japan are
dependent upon American military orders, its foreign
trade is under the control of the United States of Amer-
ica. All this causes the difficult economic position in
which Japan continues to find itself.
In the aforementioned Declaration the Soviet Union
expressed sympathy for Japan and the Japanese people,
which has found itself in a difficult position as a conse-
quence of the San Francisco treaty imposed upon it by
the United States and of other agreements, and stated
its readiness to undertake steps for the purpose of nor-
malizing its relations with Japan. The Soviet Union
noted in addition that Japan will meet with full support
in its effort to establish political and economic relations
with it, just as all steps on her side directed toward
insuring the conditions for its peaceful and independent
development will meet with full support.
Moscow, December SO, 195.'t
The Embassy
of the United States of America
Moscow
July 11, 1955
67
Extract From Report of Major General of Aviation
Makhun to the Command of Air Forces of October 26,
1952 on the Question of the Violation of the State
Boundary of the USSR in the Region of the Southern
Part of the Kurile Islands on October 7, 1952 by an
American Type B-29 Military Airplane.
The investigation was conducted by means of a thor-
ough study of official documents, journal entries of radar
stations and duty personnel at the airfield, the obtaining
of written explanations of members of the border troops
and fliers and also personal interrogation of eye witnesses
and radar personnel and fliers who took part in observing
the flight of the violator-airplane over our territory and
in warning it of this.
The investigation established :
On October 7, 1952 at 14 hours 31 minutes Khabarovsk
time an airplane of unidentified nationality which on a
course of 40-45 degrees was flying in the direction of
the southern part of the island of Tanfilev was detected
in the immediate vicinity of our State boundary by radar
installations. Continuing its flight on this course, the
foreign airplane at 14 hours 33 minutes having violated
the State boundary, entered the air space over the ter-
ritorial waters of the USSR and, approaching the south-
ern coast of the island of Tanfilev, turned and flew on
a course to the northwest over the island of Tanfilev.
Reaching the northwest end of the island of Tanfilev
the violator-airplane, evidently, after having recon-
noitered it, at 14 hours 35 minutes turned and went on
a course of 285 degrees, and after two minutes departed
from the air space of the USSR. Thus the violator-
airplane in this case was over Soviet territory for four
to five minutes.
To all appearances, not having carefully enough ex-
amined the island of Tanfilev, this same violator-airplane
at 15 hours 20 minutes violated a second time the Soviet
State boundary on a course of 40-45 degrees and, reach-
ing the point latitude 43°24' longitude 145°56', turned
to the northwest, passed over the southwestern part of
the island of Tanfilev and at 15 hours 23 minutes left
the air space of the Soviet Union.
On its second violation of the State boundary of the
Soviet Union the violator-airplane was over Soviet ter-
ritory for another three-four minutes.
Having remained several minutes outside the air space
of the Soviet Union, the violator-airplane at 15 hours 27
minutes Khabarovsk time at the point latitude 43° 18'
longitude 145° 59' on a course 90-100 degrees for a third
time violated the Soviet boundary and after crossing the
State boundary the violator-airplane went in the direc-
tion of the islands of Yuri, Zeleny, Shikotan, apparently
with the same reconnaissance purpose with respect to
these Soviet islands.
After the first violation of the State boundary the avia-
tion command, guided by the Instruction for the defense
of the State air boundaries of the USSR, sent up a pair
of fighters. The airborne fighters, having gained altitude
over the airfield, headed toward the region of the island
of Yuri.
Taking a direct course toward the region of the island
of Yuri, the pair of Soviet fighters at 15 hours 29 minutes
detected south of the island of Demin at an altitude of
5,000 meters a four-engine bomber of the B-29 type of
a dark green color with American identification marks.
After detecting the violator-airplane, which turned out
to be an American bomber of the B-29 type, the Soviet
fighters began to approach it for the purpose of warning
it that it was over Soviet territory.
During the approach the American B-29 bomber from
a distance of approximately 1,000 meters opened fire on
the Soviet fighters, one of the bursts passed near the left
wing of the lead fighter-airplane. Despite the fact that
the American aircraft had opened fire, the Soviet fliers,
without opening fire, continued the approach in order to
warn the violator-airplane that it was over our territory.
While the Soviet fighters were continuing the approach
without opening fire, the American bomber for a second
time opened fire on them.
The Soviet fighters, in view of the unsuccessful attempt
to approach and warn the violator-airplane by maneuvers
that it was over Soviet territory, were forced in answer
to the manifestly hostile act by the American bomber to
open answering fire, after which the violator-airplane
turned and with loss of altitude went off into the direction
of the sea at great speed.
In view of the small amount of fuel which our fighters
had left they took a course to their airfield after the en-
counter with the mentioned American airplane. During
the entire time of flight, including the encounter with the
American bomber, our fighters did not leave the limits
of the air space of the Soviet Union.
The weather in the region of the violation of the Soviet
boundary during the period from 14 to 16 hours Kha-
barovsk time on October 7, 1952 was slightly cloudy with
haze and visibility of 8-10 kilometers.
Conclusions
On October 7, 1952 an American four-engine bomber of
the B-29 type from 14 hours 31 minutes until 15 hours
30 minutes Khabarovsk time conducted flights obviously
for reconnaissance purposes and during the first violation
of the State boundary of the USSR in the period from 14
hours 33 minutes to 14 hours 37 minutes a reconnaissance
of the island of Tanfilev was conducted by it, during the
second violation in the period from 15 hours 20 minutes
to 15 hours 23 minutes the results of the first reconnais-
sance flight over the southwestern part of the island of
Tanfilev were verified by it.
Having fulfilled, apparently, the first part of its task
for the reconnaissance of the island of Tanfilev the Amer-
ican B-29 airplane for a third time violated the State
boundary at 15 hours 27 minutes and maintained a course
toward the Soviet islands of Yuri, Zeleny, and Shikotan
evidently for the fulfillment of the second part of its task,
that is for the reconnaissance of these islands.
Thus all three violations of the State boundary of the
Soviet Union by the American military airplane were
premeditated and were conducted with obviously hostile
purposes.
The Soviet fighters, sent to the region of the island
of Yuri with the aim of wai-ning the violator-airplane
of its presence over Soviet territory, acted in precise
68
Department of State Bulletin
conformity with the instruction for the defense of the
State boundary of the Soviet Union, took all necessary
measures, risking life, in order to warn the violator by
maneuvers without opening fire. However, in view of the
manifestation by the violator-airplane of obviously hostile
acts, after it opened Are for a second time the Soviet
fighters were compelled to give answering fire with the
aim of forcing it to quit the air space of the USSR.
Geneva Conventions for Protection of War Victims
The Senate on July 6, by a vote of 77-0, gave its
advice and consent to ratification of the Geneva
Conventions for Protection of War Victims.
Following are a statement by Deputy Under
Secretary Murphy before the Senate Foreign Re-
lations Committee on June 3 {press release 311)
in support of the conventions and a letter of March
29 from Secretary Dulles to Senator Walter F.
George, chairman of the committee, with an en-
closure, "Statement on the Geneva Conventions of
1949."
STATEMENT BY MR. MURPHY
The executive branch is requesting advice and
consent to the ratification of the Geneva Conven-
tions as the culmination of the efforts the United
States has contributed to an international en-
deavor to provide improved protection for the
victims of war. These conventions are the prod-
uct of long, hard, though unspectacular, labor.
They represent a steady evolution of international
law built upon experience. They were drawn up
by the diplomatic conference held in Geneva from
April to August 1949, which worked conscienti-
ously and in a spirit in which it can be truthfully
said political differences were largely subordi-
nated to humanitarian objectives. 1
The conventions have been in force since Octo-
ber 1950, they have been ratified by 47 states, and
they now represent an established body of inter-
national law. Action by the United States is be-
1 For a summary of the 1949 meeting, see Bulletin of
Sept. 5, 1949, p. 339. For texts of conventions and reserva-
tions made at time of signature, see S. Exec. D, E, F, and
G, 82d Cong., 1st sess.
ing sought at this time, not in order to meet a
present emergency, or with the thought that war
is inevitable ; we desire rather to confirm our sup-
port of a humanitarian cause and to extend the
protection of the conventions to our own citizens
should it ever become necessary.
Three of the conventions — those on the treat-
ment of prisoners of war, the wounded and sick,
and the wounded and sick at sea — modify previous
international law on the same subject. This basic
law had already been codified in treaties that the
Senate has previously considered and approved
and to which the United States is a party. The
1949 conventions represent improvements sug-
gested as a result of World War II experiences
shared by many countries, including the United
States. In some respects they afford more com-
plete protection, and in others they are more prac-
tical than earlier international statutes. The 1929
Prisoners-of-War Convention, for example, pre-
sented a difficulty in the provision that prisoners
of war were to be given rations equivalent to those
of garrison troops of the detaining power. Under
that standard the health of prisoners held by a
country whose garrison forces subsisted on a low-
calorie diet was gravely impaired. The new con-
vention obligates a detaining power to furnish
food rations sufficient in quantity, quality, and
variety to keep prisoners of war in good health.
Among other improvements, the convention pro-
vides for fair trial procedures for all offenses com-
mitted by prisoners of war and establishes criteria
for legitimate activity by resistance groups.
The fourth convention — that on the treatment
of civilians — is new in form and a fiords protec-
tion to categories of civilians who are particularly
July II, 7 955
69
exposed to mistreatment in time of war. The need
for this convention has long been recognized and
had been particularly urged by the European
countries who were victims of Nazi aggression.
The problems of enforcement by the United States
would not be novel in most respects. The treat-
ment envisaged for enemy aliens in this country
largely corresponds with past United States prac-
tice. During the last war civilian internees were
afforded many of the benefits of the Prisoners-of-
War Convention by mutual agreement, and the
present convention formalizes and extends these
benefits. As to occupied territory, the convention
amplifies the 1907 Hague Regulations concerning
the treatment of the general population, and it
places restraints upon an occupying power from
undertaking actions which are not reasonably nec-
essary for the conduct of military operations. The
convention for the first time codifies prescriptions
regarding civilians in one body of legislation.
The groundwork for all four conventions was
carefully prepared. Prior to the Geneva confer-
ence, two meetings enlisting authoritative and
competent opinion were held — the meeting of gov-
ernment experts in 1947 in Geneva 2 and the In-
ternational Red Cross Conference in 1948 in Stock-
holm 3 — in both of which American representa-
tives participated. These meetings drafted work-
ing papers for the 1949 Geneva conference.
A large and representative number of states —
59 in all — attended the 1949 conference at Geneva,
including several Asian states. Delegations from
former enemies — Germany and Japan — took part
in an observer capacity. The United States, be-
cause of its traditional regard for the welfare of
war victims, played a major role both in the pre-
paratory steps and in the conference proceedings.
The large number of states which have already
ratified represents a major portion of world opin-
ion approving the work of the Geneva conference.
The Soviet Union deposited its ratification last
May. It has thereby gained a propaganda ad-
vantage which it has been quick to use in recent
international meetings. It has maintained three
reservations which it put forward at the time of
signature. As set forth in the letter from the
Secretary of State to the Chairman of this com-
mittee, the United States is unable to accept these
: Bulletin of June 22, 1947, p. 1205.
'Ibid., Oct. 10, 1948, p. 464.
reservations and the similar reservations made by
other states of the Soviet bloc. At the same time,
it is in the interest of the United States that the
rules of the Geneva conventions be applied as
widely as possible in the event of armed conflict.
This is true even in relationship to countries
which have made reservations unacceptable to the
United States. We would expect, therefore, to
state in our instrument of ratification that, in be-
coming a party to the conventions, the United
States accepts treaty relations with reserving
states on all matters not covered by reservations.
If a reserving state later, through unwarranted
use of its reservations, should seek to evade its
obligations under unreserved portions of the con-
ventions, with the effect of nullifying the objec-
tives and broad humanitarian purpose of the Ge-
neva rules, the United States would be free to
consider whether in such circumstances it should
continue to assume obligations under the conven-
tion vis-a-vis a defaulting state. We believe an
appropriate caveat on this score should also be
indicated in our instrument of ratification.
The executive branch wishes to maintain the
single reservation which the United States for its
part made at the time of signing the civilian con-
vention. The present text of article 68 of that
convention provides that the occupying power may
impose the death penalty upon protected persons
only in cases involving espionage, serious acts of
sabotage, or offenses causing the death of one or
more persons and, furthermore, only if such of-
fenses were punishable by death under local law
in force before the occupation began. This text
was adopted by a majority of states at the Geneva
conference who feared abuse of the death penalty
in occupied territory or who had abolished the
death penalty in their own domestic legislation.
The United States is willing to agree not to im-
pose the death penalty except for the three spec-
ified offenses. It is unable, however, to accept
the limitation that the death penalty should not
be applied if it were not provided for the same
offense by local law existing before the occupation
started. The United States feels that the protec-
tion of its own forces in occupied territory requires
reserving to itself the power to enforce extreme
legal action against illegal activities, if it should
prove necessary.
The conventions may present a first aspect of
being complicated and untried. In actual fact,
most of the prisoner-of-war provisions have stood
70
Department of State Bulletin
the test of practical experience in the last two
great wars. The mechanisms and institutions pro-
vided for are substantially the same and could
start operating when required, making use of es-
tablished patterns and precedents. The innova-
tions the conventions present are the result of a
conscientious effort to correct abuses and to in-
crease efficiency.
The experiences of the Korean conflict empha-
sized the importance of the conventions. Our
side, in fact, applied their humanitarian provi-
sions and offered victims the protection these were
designed to achieve. The enemy's ruthless be-
havior was exposed by their disregard of the
Geneva rules. There is reason to believe that the
moral acceptance of the conventions as a general
norm did have some effect on the enemy. The
Communists to some extent improved their treat-
ment and eventually did repatriate a number of
sick and wounded as well as numbers of other pris-
oners after hostilities. With further regard to
the Korean conflict, our Unified Command, in
giving effect through the Armistice Agreement
to the principle of release and repatriation em-
ployed in the Prisoners-of-War Convention, suc-
cessfully confirmed that a detaining power has
the right to offer asylum to prisoners of war and
is not obligated to repatriate them forcibly. These
fundamental points have been upheld by an over-
whelming vote in the United Nations General
Assembly. 4
The Geneva conventions are another long step
forward toward mitigating the severities of war
on its helpless victims. They reflect enlightened
practices as carried out by the United States and
other civilized countries, and they represent
largely what the United States would do whether
or not a party to the conventions. Our own con-
duct has served to establish higher standards, and
we can only benefit by having them incorporated
in a stronger body of conventional wartime law.
We know that many nations have looked to us
for an indication as to what they should do and
have supported and acted favorably on the Geneva
conventions in the expectation that we would do
the same.
We feel that ratification of the conventions now
before you would be fully in the interest of the
United States.
SECRETARY'S LETTER
March 29, 1955
The Honorable
Walter F. George,
United States Senate.
Dear Senator George : From April 21 to Au-
gust 12, 1949, at the invitation of the Govern-
ment of Switzerland, a Diplomatic Conference for
the Establishment of International Conventions
for the Protection of War Victims was held in
Geneva, Switzerland. Fifty-nine governments
sent delegations to participate therein. The main
purpose and chief result of the conference was the
formulation and adoption of four conventions
usually referred to as the "Geneva Conventions of
1949", namely, (1) Convention for the Ameliora-
tion of the Condition of Wounded and Sick in
Armed Forces in the Field ; (2) Convention for the
Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick,
and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at
Sea; (3) Convention Relative to the Treatment of
Prisoners of War; and (4) Convention Relative to
the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of
War.
On April 26, 1951, the Conventions were trans-
mitted to the Senate with a request for considera-
tion and advice and consent to ratification. 5 Sub-
sequently, the Department of State suggested that
the Senate should not act on them in view of the
Korean conflict. At the present time, however,
forty-seven nations have ratified or acceded to the
Conventions, making it a matter of importance
to the United States, and to many other nations,
that the Senate take action with respect to the Con-
ventions. Therefore, I am transmitting herewith
a statement supplementing the report and detailed
commentaries accompanying the Presidential
message by which the Conventions were referred
to the Senate (Senate Executives D, E, F, and G,
82d Congress, 1st Session). The supplementary
statement now transmitted contains new material,
and deals with the present status of the Conven-
tions, the character of various reservations made
to the Conventions by certain states, and the ap-
plication of the Conventions in Korea, particu-
larly with reference to Article 118 of the Prisoners
of War Convention and the question of asylum.
It is believed that this information will be of
particular importance and interest to the Senate
'For text of U.N. resolution, see Hid., Dec. 8, 1952,
p. 916.
1 Ibid., May 28, 1951, p. 866.
July 7 7, 7955
71
in connection with its consideration of the
Conventions.
At the time the Conventions were submitted to
the Senate, a request was made that, in the event
the Senate advises and consents to the ratification
of the Convention relative to the Protection of
Civilian Persons in Time of War, it do so subject
to a reservation regarding the right to impose the
death penalty in accordance with the provisions of
Article 68, paragraph 2, without regard to whether
the offenses referred to therein are punishable by
death under the law of the occupied territory at
the time the occupation begins. The Executive
Branch still desires that the Senate approval be
accompanied by such a reservation.
Certain reservations have been made by other
governments to Articles 10, 12, and 85 of the re-
spective Conventions as explained in the accom-
panying statement. It is particularly recom-
mended that this Government should not accept
these reservations. The United States should,
however, express its intention to enter into treaty
relations with the reserving states so that they
will be bound toward the United States to carry
out all the provisions of the Conventions on which
no reservations were specifically made. It should
be clear that we hope that the reserving states
will at some time elect to withdraw their reserva-
tions and become bound by the reserved balance
of the Conventions. If they do not, and if in the
event of conflict reserving states seek to use their
reservations in an unwarranted fashion so as to
defeat the broad humanitarian purposes of the
Conventions, the United States would, of course,
be in a position to consider that it was not re-
quired further to apply the Conventions vis-a-vis
such defaulting states. The Executive Branch is
prepared to discuss with the Committee on For-
eign Relations a statement with this general effect
to accompany the United States instruments of
ratification.
Experience in World War II made apparent
the need for revision of the previous conventions
applicable to prisoners of war and the wounded
and sick, and for a separate convention defining
the treatment to be accorded certain categories
of civilians in wartime. The Conventions as for-
mulated generally reflect United States practice
and prescribe methods of conduct which the
United States would attempt to pursue in absence
of such treaties. Historically, this Nation has
always taken pride in its leading role of helping
to establish and apply humane standards for the
protection of the wounded, sick, and defenseless
in time of war. The United States from the be-
ginning supported the initiative taken by the In-
ternational Committee of the Red Cross in the
fall of 1945 to revise and extend the previous
conventions.
Accordingly, I believe the United States should
no longer delay action; that it should clearly
manifest its interest in these humanitarian con-
ventions by ratification of them. I say this not
in the belief of the inevitability of armed conflict,
but with the thought that this Nation should asso-
ciate itself with conventions which are designed to
alleviate the sufferings of any victims in the event
of a future conflict. Our participation is needed
to enlist the authority of the United States in
their interpretation and enforcement and to en-
able us to invoke them for the protection of our
nationals.
For the foregoing reasons, it is hoped that the
Conventions may receive early and favorable con-
sideration by the United States Senate.
Sincerely yours,
John Foster Dulles
Enclosure : Statement on the Geneva Conventions of 1949.
Statement on the Geneva Conventions of 1949
I
Status of the Conventions
The four Conventions, which entered into force
on October 21, 1950, have been ratified by the
following signatories: Austria, Belgium, Bul-
garia, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic,
Chile, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Ecuador,
Egypt, El Salvador, Finland, France, Guatemala,
Hungary, the Holy See, India, Israel, Italy, Leb-
anon, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Mexico, Mon-
aco, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, Norway, Paki-
stan, the Philippines, Poland, Rumania, Spain,
Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Turkey, Ukrainian
Soviet Socialist Republic, the Union of Soviet
Socialist Republics, and Yugoslavia. Adherences
have been deposited by the Federal Republic of
Germany, Japan, Jordan, Liberia, San Marino,
Thailand, the Union of South Africa, and Viet-
Nam.
71
Department of State Bulletin
II
Reservations to the Conventions
At the time of signing the Conventions, reserva-
tions were made by certain of the signatory states.
Those reservations have been confirmed by each
of the reserving states which has since ratified the
Conventions upon deposit of its instrument of
ratification. It is anticipated that the other res-
ervations will likewise be maintained when rati-
fication takes place. Subject to the possibility
that a state which is or becomes a party should
seek to establish that the reservations are such as
to preclude the reserving states from becoming a
party at all in the absence of consent from all states
concerned, the conventions have come or will come
into force for the reserving states with their reser-
vations maintained.
Reservation by the United States and other States
to Article 68 of the Civilian Convention
The United States' only reservation at time of
signature was with respect to Article 68 of the Con-
vention relative to the Protection of Civilian Per-
sons wherein there are set forth certain restrictions
upon the imposition of the death penalty in oc-
cupied territory. The Article provides that the
Occupying Power may impose the death penalty
upon protected persons in occupied territory for
violation of its penal provisions issued and pro-
mulgated under Articles 61 and 65 only in cases
where the person is guilty of espionage, of seri-
ous acts of sabotage against the military installa-
tions of the Occupying Power, or of intentional
offenses which have caused the death of one or
more persons. The United States was willing to
bind itself not to impose the death penalty for
violation of occupation orders except for these
three offenses. However, Article 68 further pro-
vides that even in those cases the death penalty
can be imposed only if such offenses were punish-
able by death under the law of the occupied terri-
tory in force before the occupation began.
Adoption of this limitation at the Geneva Con-
ference was brought about by those countries with
recent experience under military occupation in
which the death penalty was imposed upon a
wholesale basis and by those countries which have
abolished the death penalty in their penal systems.
The United States and the United Kingdom
strongly opposed the limitation in terms of the
local law upon the ground that, unless an Occupy-
ing Power possessed power to take drastic legal
action against illegal combatant activities, it
would be unable to protect itself against such
activities. For these reasons, the United States
signed the Civilian Convention with a reservation
which reserves the right to impose the death
penalty in accordance with the provisions of
Article 68, paragraph 2, without regard to whether
the offenses referred to therein are punishable by
death under the law of the occupied territory at
the beginning of the occupation. A similar reser-
vation to Article 68 was also made by Canada,
New Zealand, the Netherlands, and the United
Kingdom. Argentina also made a reservation
with respect to Article 68, but phrased it in general
terms and did not relate it specifically to para-
graph 2 thereof.
Common Article 10
Common Article 10 (Article 11 of the Civilian
Convention) provides for substitutes for Protect-
ing Powers when protected persons for any reason
do not benefit by the activities of such a Power.
In such an event, the Detaining Power is required
unilaterally to request a neutral state or an impar-
tial humanitarian organization to undertake the
functions performed by a Protecting Power. If
such protection cannot be arranged, the Detaining
Power is obligated to request or accept the offer of
the services of a humanitarian organization, such
as the International Committee of the Red Cross,
to assume the humanitarian functions performed
by Protecting Powers.
These provisions were opposed at the Geneva
Conference by the delegations of the Soviet bloc
states (Albania, Bulgaria, Byelorussia, Czechoslo-
vakia, Hungary, Poland, Rumania, the Ukraine,
and Union of Soviet Socialist Republics), Portu-
gal, and Yugoslavia on the basis that they di-
minish the belligerent rights of the state on which
the protected persons depend. Accordingly, each
of those states made a reservation thereto which
stated that it will not recognize the validity of re-
quests made by the Detaining Power to a neutral
state or to a humanitarian organization to under-
take the functions performed by a Protecting
Power unless the consent of the government of the
state of which the protected persons are nationals
has been obtained.
July II, 1955
73
Article 12 of the Prisoners of War Convention
Article 12 of the Prisoners of War Convention
(Article 45 of the Civilian Convention) contains
provisions regulating the transfer of prisoners of
war or protected persons from the capturing
Power to another Power. Transfers between par-
ties to the Convention are recognized, but in such
cases the transferring Power must satisfy itself of
the willingness and ability of the transferee Power
to apply the Convention. Nevertheless, if the
transferee Power fails to carry out the Convention,
the transferring Power, upon being so informed
by the Protecting Power, must take effective meas-
ures to correct the situation or have the transferred
persons returned to it. The transferee Power is
obligated to honor a request for their return.
These provisions are a compromise between the
view that once a transfer was made the transfer-
ring Power should be relieved of further responsi-
bility and the view that responsibility for trans-
ferees should at all times be joint. The Soviet
bloc states and Yugoslavia supported the latter
view and made reservations to the effect that they
do not consider as valid the freeing of a Detaining
Power, which has transf erred prisoners of war and
protected persons to another Power, from respon-
sibility for the application of the convention to
such persons while in the custody of the Power
accepting them.
Article 85 of the Prisoners of War Convention
Article 85 of the Prisoners of War Convention
relates to the treatment of prisoners of war who
are prosecuted and sentenced for precapture of-
fenses. It provides that prisoners of war prose-
cuted under the laws of the Detaining Power for
acts committed prior to capture shall retain, even
if convicted, the benefits of the Convention. The
question whether such prisoners who might be war
criminals should benefit in full by the guarantees
of the Convention the same as other prisoners of
war was the subject of extensive controversy at
the Geneva Conference. The Soviet bloc states
proposed to add to the Article : "Prisoners of war
convicted under the laws of the country where
they are in captivity for war crimes or crimes
against humanity, in accordance with the prin-
ciples laid down at Nuremberg, shall be subject to
the prison regime laid down in that country for
persons undergoing punishment." This amend-
ment was rejected by a large majority of the Con-
ference, resulting in a reservation by the Soviet
bloc states to the effect that they do not consider
themselves "bound by the obligation, which fol-
lows from Article 85, to extend the application of
the Convention to prisoners of war who have been
convicted under the law of the Detaining Power,
in accordance with the principles of the Nurem-
berg trial, for war crimes and crimes against hu-
manity, it being understood that prisoners con-
victed of such crimes must be subject to the
conditions obtaining in the country in question
for those who undergo their punishment."
Miscellaneous Reservations
Certain other reservations were made at the time
of signature of the Conventions. Argentina, in
addition to the reservation noted above, signed the
Conventions with a reservation that it would con-
sider common Article 3 (Conflicts not of an In-
ternational Character) to be the only article, to
the exclusion of all others, which would be appli-
cable in the case of armed conflicts not of an
international character. Brazil made two express
reservations to the Civilian Convention: one in
regard to Article 44 (Treatment of Refugees) on
the ground that it was liable to hamper the action
of the Detaining Power, and another in regard to
Article 46 (Cancellation of Restrictive Measures)
on the ground that the matter dealt with in the
second paragraph thereof was considered to be
"outside the scope of the Convention, the essential
and specific purpose of which is the protection of
persons and not of their property." Italy reserved
in respect of the last paragraph of Article 66 (Set-
tlement of Prisoners of War Accounts) of the
Prisoners of War Convention.
As well as making a reservation regarding Ar-
ticle 68, New Zealand also signed the Civilian
Convention subject to the reservation that "in
view of the fact that the General Assembly of the
United Nations, having approved the principles
established by the Charter and judgment of the
Nuremberg Tribunal, has directed the Interna-
tional Law Commission to include these principles
in a General codification of offenses against the
peace and security of mankind, New Zealand re-
serves the right to take such action as may be nec-
essary to ensure that such offenses are punished,
notwithstanding the provisions of Article 70, par-
agraph I."
The Prisoners of War Convention was signed
on behalf of Luxembourg with a reservation that
74
Department of State Bulletin
its existing national law shall continue to be ap-
plied to cases now under consideration. Spain
made a broad reservation to that Convention stat-
ing that in matters regarding procedural guar-
antees and penal and disciplinary sanctions, Spain
will grant prisoners of war the same treatment as
is provided by its legislation for members of its
own national forces. Also, with respect to the
phrase "International Law in force" in Article 99
(Judicial Proceedings against Prisoners of War),
Spain declared that thereunder it only accepts in-
ternational law which arises from contractual
sources or which has been previously elaborated by
organizations in which it participates.
Portugal, along with the reservation to common
Article 10 previously mentioned, reserved the
right not to apply the provisions of common
Article 3, in so far as they may be contrary to
the provisions of Portuguese law, in all terri-
tories subject to its sovereignty in any part of the
world. With respect to Article 13 of the Sick and
Wounded Convention and Article 4 of the Pris-
oners of War Convention, relating to categories
of persons protected, the Portuguese Government
made a reservation regarding the application of
those Articles "in all cases in which the legitimate
Government has already asked for and agreed to
an armistice or the suspension of military opera-
tions of no matter what character, even if the
armed forces in the field have not yet capitulated."
Another Portuguese reservation provides that,
with respect to Article 60 (Advances of Pay) of
the Prisoners of War Convention, Portugal in no
case binds itself to grant prisoners a monthly rate
of pay in excess of 50% of the pay clue to Portu-
guese soldiers of equivalent appointment or rank
on active service in the combat zone.
Finally the failure of the Geneva Convention
to accept the Red Shield of David as one of the
distinctive signs and emblems provided for in the
Sick and Wounded Conventions, evoked a reser-
vation from Israel that it would use that emblem
on the flags, armlets, and on all equipment em-
ployed in the medical services, and as the distinc-
tive sign provided for in the Civilian Convention.
Ill
Application of the Geneva Conventions in the
Korean Conflict
Applicability of the Conventions
The Prisoners of War Convention. When the
Korean conflict broke out, none of the early par-
ticipants was party to the Geneva Convention rela-
tive to the Treatment of Prisoners of War of 1949.
During the course of hostilities, a number of the
governments contributing troops to the Unified
Command in Korea did ratify the Convention. It
was, however, the Unified Command, exercised by
the United States, which acted as the detaining
power in the Korean conflict, and not the various
states contributing troops.
While the Convention was not recognized as
being in force with respect to the parties to the
Korean conflict, both sides stated they would apply
its principles. Statements by the United States,
the Republic of Korea and the North Korean
regime had been made to this general effect by
July 15, 1950, were never disavowed, and were
supplemented by further statements on both
sides.
There is no record that the Chinese Commu-
nist regime or the commander of its "volunteers"
explicitly undertook to abide by the Convention.
However, the Foreign Minister of the Communist
regime during the course of the Korean hostilities,
on July 16, 1952, informed the Swiss Government
that the Chinese Communist Government had de-
cided to "recognize" the Geneva Conventions of
1949, subject to certain reservations.
The General Assembly of the United Nations
made clear its belief that the Convention should be
regarded as applicable to the Korean conflict.
Such was the basic assumption underlying the de-
bate on release and repatriation of prisoners in
the Assembly at the end of 1952. The General
Assembly resolution of December 3, 1952 included
the following:
II. The release and repatriation of prisoners of war
shall be effected in accordance with the Geneva Conven-
tion relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, dated
12 August 1949, the well-established principles and prac-
tice of International law and the relevant provisions of
the draft armistice agreement.
Similarly, the prisoner of war agreement annexed
to the armistice 6 provides, in regard to the activi-
ties of the Neutral Nations Repatriation Com-
mittee : "This Commission shall ensure that pris-
oners of war shall at all times be treated humanely
in accordance with the specific provisions of the
Geneva Convention, and with the general spirit
of that Convention."
The other three Conventions (Sick and
Wounded at Sea, Civilian) . Like the Prisoners
' Ilia., June 22, 1953, p. 866.
July 7 7, 7955
75
of War Convention, the other three Conventions
did not become legally applicable in Korea.
While the statement of the North Korean au-
thorities regarding the voluntary application of
the principles of the Prisoners of War Convention
was limited to that Convention, statements of the
United Nations side and the "recognition" by the
Chinese Communists referred to all four Conven-
tions.
The United Nations Command in its treatment
of the wounded and sick under its control in Korea
acted in conformity with the humanitarian prin-
ciples of the two 1949 Conventions for the Ameli-
oration of the Wounded and Sick of forces re-
spectively in the field and at sea. There was, of
course, little or no naval action such as envisaged
by the Convention relating to personnel at sea.
Similarly throughout the conflict such civilians
as were the responsibility of the United Nations
Command were treated in conformity with the
humanitarian principles of the 1949 Civilian Con-
vention. The International Committee of the Red
Cross was informed regarding such persons, and
its delegates had access to them. However, the
applicability of the Civilian Convention was lim-
ited so far as the United Nations Command was
concerned. Political authority in Southern Korea
remained in the Republic of Korea and the United
Nations Command did not, in general, assume
responsibility for the civilian population.
Centralized Responsibilities for Prisoners of War
in the United Nations Command and the Uni-
fied Command
Shortly after the opening hostilities in Korea,
the Security Council of the United Nations on
July 7, 1950, requested members to contribute
forces to a Unified Command under the United
States and asked the United States to designate
the Commander. The other U.N. Members which
contributed units placed them under this Com-
mand. By agreement Republic of Korea forces
also came under this Command. The fact that the
centralized command was established before other
U.N. units entered the field, and that few other
contingents were of sufficient size to handle pris-
oners of war, resulted in centralized responsibility
for prisoners in the hands of the United Nations
Command. The United Nations Command — the
military authority in the field — acted as the cap-
turing force. The United States Government as
the Unified Command — which exercised political
authority over the United Nations Command —
acted as the detaining power.
Treatment of Prisoners of War in the Light of the
Prisoners of War Convention
Although both sides in the conflict stated that
they would apply the humanitarian principles of
the Geneva Convention, there was a stark differ-
ence in the treatment which the two sides in fact
accorded to prisoners of war captured by them.
The United Nations Command, from the very be-
ginning of hostilities until the release or transfer
of the last prisoners in its hands following the
armistice, scrupulously lived up to the principles
of the Convention. The United Nations Com-
mand sent lists of captured personnel to the Inter-
national Committee of the Red Cross, as provided
for in the Convention, which in turn transmitted
them to the Communists. The United Nations
Command welcomed the offer of services by the
Icrc, admitted its representatives to its prisoner
of war camps, gave them every reasonable facility,
for inspection and reporting on the treatment of
prisoners of war. The humane treatment of the
prisoners was especially noteworthy in view of
provocation by some Communist prisoners and
their repeated efforts to foment disorder. The
reports of the Icrc on the conditions in Unc
camps were almost uniformly favorable.
On the other hand, the Communists, while
claiming they were abiding by the Convention,
failed to live up to it in virtually every important
respect. Except for two token lists totaling 110
names transmitted to the Icrc in the early days of
hostilities, the Communists did not inform the Unc
through the Icrc, or in any other official manner,
of the identity of captured personnel during more
than 18 months of fighting. It was not until
hostilities had been in progress for a year and a
half, and after repeated insistence by the Unc
armistice negotiators, that the Communists pro-
vided any lists of captured prisoners. The Com-
munists failed to designate an impartial humani-
tarian organization such as the Icrc, and they
rejected the persistent efforts of the Icrc to obtain
entry into the Communist Prisoners of War
camps. Until almost the very end of hos-
tilities, they refused to exchange relief pack-
ages, and even mail was not exchanged for
most of the period and then only on a limited basis.
76
Department of Sfafe Bulletin
The Communists did not report on the health of
prisoners of war, and until the final stage of the
conflict (April 1953) refused to exchange seriously
sick and wounded. The Communists failed to
give the accurate location of their prisoner of war
camps and to mark them properly. They situated
camps in positions of danger in proximity to
legitimate military targets. Most serious was the
record, established after careful investigation, of
killings, beatings, starvation, and other atrocities
against Unc troops taken prisoner by the Com-
munists.
These were respects in which the Communists
were known to be violating the Geneva Conven-
tion during the course of hostilities. Other vio-
lations could not be investigated because the Com-
munists had refused to allow inspection of their
camps by representatives of an impartial humani-
tarian organization like the Icrc, in direct viola-
tion of the Geneva Convention. After the close
of hostilities, returning prisoners of war brought
additional evidence of numerous violations of the
principles of the Geneva Convention. The Com-
munists have not yet returned nor satisfactorily
accounted for many prisoners of war, a number of
whom are known to be still alive and in their
custody.
The Issue of Release and Repatriation of Prisoners
of War
Development of the Issue in the Armistice Nego-
tiations. The most difficult issue in the Korean
armistice negotiations concerned the release and
repatriation of prisoners of war which was to
follow the end of hostilities. The issue was the
subject of negotiations over a period of a year
and a half.
As increasing numbers of prisoners came into
Unc hands, it became clear that a substantial num-
ber of them believed that they would suffer death
or injury if returned to the Communists. Many
of them made it clear that they would violently
resist such return. The UN Command, with the
unanimous agreement of the governments with
forces in Korea, concluded, therefore, that the Unc
should not use force to return to the Communists
any prisoners who resisted repatriation.
The Unc negotiators emphasized that the Unc
did not wish to retain a single prisoner of war,
nor did it wish to send a single prisoner to any
particular destination. It agreed that all prison-
ers who wished to be repatriated were entitled to
be repatriated; it was willing to repatriate all
who desired rejtatriation, but it would not agree
that force should be used to repatriate any one
of them who resisted. The Unc offered the Com-
munists numerous proposals and agreed to con-
sider any reasonable proposal so long as it was
consistent with the principle that force should not
be used to repatriate any prisoners.
The Communists insisted that in fact there were
no prisoners who refused to be repatriated and
that those who were alleged to have refused re-
patriation were intimidated into doing so. At the
same time they refused to agree to any plan for
impartially determining the true attitudes of
individual prisoners.
The Communists also insisted that the so-called
principle of non-forceable repatriation was con-
trary to the Geneva Convention. They cited in
particular Article 118 which provides in part,
"Prisoners of war shall be released and repatri-
ated without delay after the cessation of active
hostilities." This provision, they insisted, re-
quired that every prisoner be handed back to the
side he had fought on and allowed for no excep-
tions.
The Unc, on the other hand, insisted that the
Geneva Convention of 1949 did not impose a duty
on the prisoner of war to return. It did not
impose on the detaining power the duty to return
prisoners of war by force against the prisoner's
wishes. It did impose on the detaining power the
duty to offer every prisoner an unrestricted op-
portunity to go home. The Unc's position was
thus premised on the traditional right of a gov-
ernment to grant asylum to prisoners of war, as
well as civilians. Neither Article 118 nor any
other provision of the Geneva Convention was de-
signed to terminate the right of the detaining
power to grant asylum if it so desired ; the nego-
tiating history of the Geneva Convention of 1919
so indicated and international practice, including
the practice of the Soviet Government, affords au-
thority for the granting of asylum to prisoners.
The United Nations General Assembly had rec-
ognized in General Assembly Eesolution 427 (V)
of December 14, 1950, dealing with the problem
of Axis prisoners of war not yet repatriated or
accounted for by the Soviet Union, that the Ge-
neva Convention Eelative to the Treatment of
Prisoners of War of 1949 and existing interna-
July 7 7, 7955
77
tional law established that the principle of release
and repatriation means that prisoners should be
"given an unrestricted opportunity of repatria-
tion".
Outcome of the Issue. The issue of release and
repatriation in Korea was fully debated in the
United Nations General Assembly at its Eighth
Session at the end of 1952. Secretary Acheson
put the legal position of the Unified Command
succinctly in his report to the General Assembly
on October 24, 1952, at the outset of its debate : 7
"a detaining state retains discretion as to whether
it shall honor a claim for asylum or not. It may,
of course, exercise that right; it would be un-
thinkable for anything else to be the case." The
Problem, of Peace in Korea, 84 (Department of
State Publication 4771, October 1952) . The Com-
munist side was presented by the Soviet bloc,
which made it clear that they conceded no right
of asylum to a prisoner of war, who, they main-
tained, remains subject to military discipline and
must be repatriated whether or not he so desires.
The position taken by the Unified Command
won overwhelming support in the General Assem-
bly. On December 3, 1952, at the end of the
debate, the General Assembly adopted Resolu-
tion 610 (VII), in which it affirmed that in the
Korean conflict "force shall not be used against
prisoners of war to prevent or effect their return
to their homelands", that "they shall at all times
be treated humanely in accordance with the spe-
cific provisions of the Geneva Convention and
with the general spirit of the Convention" and
that "the release and repatriation of prisoners of
war shall be effected in accordance with the
'Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of
Prisoners of War', dated 12 August 1949, the well-
established principles and practice of inter-
national law and the relevant provisions of the
draft armistice agreement." The Soviet bloc
voted against this resolution and maintained their
position.
The agreement on prisoners of war subsequently
entered into by both sides at Panmunjom and
made part of the Armistice Agreement provided
an unrestricted opportunity of repatriation to all
prisoners of war in the following manner:
(a) It required that both sides "without offer-
ing any hindrance, directly repatriate and hand
7 Ibid., Nov. 3, 1952, p. 679, and Nov. 10, 1952, p. 744.
over in groups all those prisoners of war in its
custody who insist on repatriation to the side to
which they belonged at the time of capture."
(b) It further required that both sides "hand
over all those remaining prisoners f war w h
are not directly repatriated to the Neutral Nations
Repatriation Commission for disposition in ac-
cordance with the following provisions."
(c) The provisions referred to established a
Neutral Nations Repatriation Commission "in
order to ensure that all prisoners of war have the
opportunity to exercise their right to be repatri-
ated following an armistice". They established
procedures for "explanations and interviews".
They provided that "No force or threat of force
shall be used against the prisoners of war . . .
and no violence to their persons or affront to their
dignity or self-respect shall be permitted in any
manner for any purpose whatsoever," except, of
course, that the Commission was authorized "to
exercise its legitimate functions and responsibili-
ties for the control of the prisoners of war." The
Commission was required, at the end of a specified
period, and in the absence of other provision by the
projected political conference, to "declare the re-
lief from the prisoner of war status to civilian
status of any prisoners of war who have not
exercized their right to be repatriated." Pro-
vision was made for such persons to be assisted
if they should seek to go to neutral nations.
The General Assembly returned to the problem
of Axis prisoners of war in Soviet hands in De-
cember 1953 and over the opposition of the Soviet
bloc, reconfirmed the view of its resolution of
December 14, 1950, as above quoted, that the prin-
ciple of release and repatriation means granting
an unrestricted opportunity of repatriation (Gen-
eral Assembly Resolution 741 (VIII) of Decem-
ber 7, 1953 ). 8
The Korean experience has served to clarify
and strengthen the humanitarian meaning and
effect of Article 118. In short, the history and
terms of the 1949 Convention, the resolutions and
debates of the United Nations General Assembly,
and the terms and effect of the. Korean Armistice
Agreement, show that Article 118 is fully satisfied
if the detaining power affords an unrestricted
opportunity of rejjatriation, and that the principle
of release and repatriation in this Article permits
the grant of asylum to a prisoner of war. In any
" Ibid., Dec. 28, 1953, p. 904.
78
Department of State Bulletin
case, the provisions of the Convention for im-
partial scrutiny would apply.
Implementation of the Prisoner of War
Provisions of the Armistice Agreement
The position of the Unified Command in regard
to nonforceable repatriation was fully vindicated
in the experience following the Armistice. The
Unc cooperated with the Neutral Nations Repa-
triation Commission as required by the Armistice
Agreement. The overwhelming majority of the
prisoners whom the Unc had turned over to the
custody of the Commission, however, made it quite
clear that they would not accept repatriation to the
Communists and generally they even refused to
hear "explanations" from the Communists.
The Unc refused to agree to re-open or extend
the period of the explanations and insisted that
the time table established in the Armistice Agree-
ment must be scrupulously observed. When the
Commission, instead of declaring the release of the
prisoners in its custody to civilian status, as re-
quired by the Armistice Agreement, proposed to
return the prisoners to the custody of the two sides,
the Unc permitted the prisoners to return as per-
sons entitled to their freedom through expiration
of the time set in the Armistice Agreement.
The Unc thus respected the right of all pris-
oners of war in its custody to be released from
prisoner of war status in accordance with the
Armistice Agreement and Article 118 of the Ge-
neva Convention. It is clear, however, that the
Communists have not yet released all the prisoners
whom they hold and have not even accounted sat-
isfactorily for all prisoners captured by them.
Although the Communists continue to deny that
there are other prisoners, they have in effect ad-
mitted violation of the Geneva Convention and
the Armistice Agreement by retaining U.S. armed
forces personnel, 11 of whom they recently sen-
tenced as spies despite the fact that they were shot
down in uniform during the Korean hostilities. 9
This action has been condemned by the U.N. Gen-
eral Assembly which asked the Secretary-General
to make efforts to obtain the release of those pris-
oners and all other captured personnel of the Unc
still detained. 10 These efforts are now in process. 11
"Ibid., Dec. 6, 1954, p. 856.
10 Ibid., Dec. 20, 1954, p. 931.
11 For statements on the recent release of four U.S. fliers,
see ibid., June 13, 1955, p. 953.
Relevance of Korean Experience
The Korean experience is only a partial and spe-
cial example of how the Conventions may affect
the United States in any future conflict. It does
show, however, that the United States because of
its traditional regard for human rights, welfare
and dignity would support the humanitarian
standards laid down in the Conventions in the
event of future hostilities and would wish to be in
the best position to invoke these standards. To
the extent that the Geneva Conventions represent
a standard of humanitarian behavior which world
opinion recognizes, they may accordingly be ex-
pected to constitute a deterrent to excesses in the
treatment of victims of war. United States ratifi-
cation of the Geneva Conventions, by lending fur-
ther support to their standards should influence
favorably future behavior toward prisoners of
war. In short, the legal and psychological sanc-
tions by which inhumane treatment may be mini-
mized or prevented should be strengthened by ex-
tending the binding character of these conventions.
World Peace Council
In response to an inquiry from Representative
A. Clayton Powell, Jr., the Department of State
prepared a detailed report on the history of the
World Peace Council. Following are the texts
of the Department's letter to Representative
Powell dated May 27 and his reply of June 6.
LETTER TO REPRESENTATIVE POWELL
May 27, 1955
Dear Mr. Powell: Your communication of
May 4, 1955, receipt of which was acknowledged
by telephone to your office on May 7, requested
background information on the World Peace
Council.
With the thought that you would be interested
in somewhat detailed information on the subject,
the Department is replying herewith at some
length. The letter and enclosure from the World
Peace Council headquarters in Vienna which you
thoughtfully transmitted to the Department are
being returned with this letter, copies having been
made for the Department files.
It should be noted, as you may perhaps have
become aware, that the meeting in Helsinki of
July II, 7955
79
the World Peace Council-sponsored World As-
sembly for Peace, originally scheduled to convene
on May 22, has been postponed to June 22.
The World Peace Council is the outgrowth of
the Communist-sponsored World Congress of
Intellectuals for Peace which was organized at
Wroclow, Poland, in 1947, and the subsequent
World Committee of Partisans of Peace organ-
ized in April 1949. This committee was renamed
the World Peace Council and its headquarters
were established in Paris. After expulsion from
Paris in 1951, the Council's headquarters were
transferred first to Prague and subsequently to
Vienna which is its present seat.
Among the major international communist
fronts, the World Peace Council has during the
past few years emerged as one of the most active
and influential. The executive officers of the
World Peace Council constitute a group of indi-
viduals who also are functionaries of such other
Communist-front organizations as the World
Federation of Trade Unions, the Women's Inter-
national Democratic Federation, the World Fed-
eration of Scientific Workers, and the Interna-
tional Association of Democratic Lawyers. Some
of these organizations are identified below. Not
only does the World Peace Council coordinate its
activities closely with Soviet policy, but it also
serves to set the major themes and coordinates the
"peace" campaigns of the world-wide Communist-
front organizational apparatus.
The World Peace Council is an assembly with
some 400 seats. 77 of the seats belong to repre-
sentatives of communist countries. The actual
governing body is the Permanent Executive Bu-
reau of 50 members, including a President and
Secretary-General. The former, Professor Fred-
eric Joliot-Curie, and the latter, Jean Lafitte, are
both confirmed Communists.
Collaborating organizations supporting World
Peace Council programs include :
The World Federation of Trade Unions
(Wfttj). The Wfttj became a completely com-
munist-dominated organization early in 1949,
when the free unions seceded and formed their
own organization. Nominal guidance comes from
the World Trade Union Congresses, but real
power rests with an 18-man Executive Bureau.
Subordinate "Trade Departments" meet inde-
pendently on an international scale, but serve
primarily as propaganda adjuncts to the Wfttj.
The World Federation of Democratic Youth
(Wfdt), at first also a "non-political" movement,
was isolated as communist-dominated in 1949, by
which time most of its non-communist members
had resigned and formed their own organization.
The ruling group is an Executive Committee con-
sisting of 23 officials.
The International Union of Students (Ius),
another arm of the Communist propaganda ap-
paratus used by the World Peace Council is com-
pletely dominated by Communists, even though
it claims to represent the "democratic students of
the whole world." Nominally the World Student
Congress is the highest administrative body, but
actual power resides in the Council and its smaller
Executive Committee.
To complete the list a number of other inter-
national fronts may be cited which collaborate
with the World Peace Council: Women's Inter-
national Democratic Federation (Widf) ; Inter-
national Federation of Resistance Fighters
(Fie) ; International Association of Democratic
Lawyers (Iadl) ; Committee for Promotion of
International Trade (Cpit) ; International Or-
ganization of Journalists (Ioj) ; World Federa-
tion of Scientific Workers (Wfsw) ; Interna-
tional Broadcasting Organization (Oir).
Beginning in 1950, the World Peace Council
has launched a series of world-wide campaigns
involving collection of signatures for various ap-
peals. Its current project of this nature is the
so-called "Vienna Appeal Against Preparations
for Atomic War", the text of which is as follows :
Certain governments are today preparing to launch an
atomic war. They are trying to make the peoples accept
this as inevitable. The use of atomic weapons would
result in a war of extermination.
We declare that any government which unleashes
atomic war will forfeit the confidence of its own people
and find itself condemned by all nations. Now and in
the future we will resist those who organize atomic war.
We demand that all stocks of atomic weapons, wherever
they may be, shall be destroyed and that their production
shall cease immediately.
The Vienna Appeal against atomic war was
sponsored by 83 representatives representing 31
countries. When Joliot-Curie presented it at a
World Peace Council Bureau meeting in Vienna
in January of this year he demanded that the
signature campaign in its support "must start
immediately." At a press conference after the
Bureau meeting some of the more important par-
ticipants in the World Peace Council stated that
80
Department of State Bulletin
this appeal for one billion signatures "was not a
propaganda campaign."
Immediately after conclusion of the Vienna
meeting preparations for the campaign started in
France, Austria, East Germany, and Japan. In
January the Cominform Journal endorsed the
Vienna appeal with an article, "Struggle against
Criminal Schemes of Atom Maniacs — Cause of all
Peoples."
The Vienna Appeal campaign is expected to
serve as background for the Helsinki Conference.
The conference itself will comprise the latest at-
tempt of the World Peace Council to obtain par-
ticipation of persons not previously associated
with the World Peace Council and thus to acquire
the appearance of legitimate and constructive ac-
tivity in the interests of peace.
The World Peace Assembly scheduled for Hel-
sinki does not differ in kind from other post-war
conferences of the World Peace Council. With-
out exception, they are taken up with some aspect
of the Soviet Union's peace campaign, e.g., out-
lawry of the atomic bomb, five-power peace pacts
and negotiations to end international disputes.
These general appeals are usually linked to specific
area problems (rearmament of Germany, armistice
in Korea) or problems of special interest groups
(speed-up and exploitation of workers in rearma-
ment programs). The Peace Council invariably
tries to influence non-Communists and attract
them to their meetings. The major importance of
these international Communist front peace meet-
ings is not, paradoxically, the event itself. The
meeting serves both as the climax to an intensive
round of propaganda and agitation and often as
the prelude to yet another round. And, in the
same way, the intent of the meeting — to discuss
"urgent questions relating to the struggle for
peace" — is not the real intent, which has more to
do with inoculating the people with a given set of
prejudices and enthusiasms.
An examination of Communist propaganda cen-
tering on the "Vienna Appeal" for one billion sig-
natures bears out these generalizations. There is
a massive campaign going on within the Com-
munist orbit not merely to collect signatures for
the destruction of the bombs (for this routine is,
of itself, of no practical importance) , but to con-
vince the population of the "peaceful intentions"
of the Soviet regime, its desire for disarmament
and peaceful uses of atomic energy and for peace-
ful settlement of international disputes in contrast
to what is pictured as an aggressive United States
policy which is described as testing and building
bigger bombs, and calling into being a new Ger-
man army directed against Eastern Europe.
The campaign in the Communist areas is the
occasion for another demonstration of the citizen's
loyalty to the state, not merely in the form of his
signature, but in his active participation in the
campaign in pledging something concrete to the
state. It is, in short, the kind of exercise that is
intrinsic to a totalitarian state which can never
take the loyalty of its citizens for granted and
repeatedly resorts to contrived situations to shock
and intimidate the population to greater per-
formance.
The collection of signatures in a Communist
country is, therefore, not a mechanical affair.
That is, the purpose is not merely to acquire a
given quota of signatures. The Communists can
announce any figure they please, as long as it is
within reason, demographically speaking. What
is more important for the Communist regime is to
use the occasion to align their countries with the
USSR in the "Vienna Appeal," to indoctrinate
their citizens, to inoculate the population with
anti-American feeling and to appeal for more pro-
duction. The following excerpts from Communist
propaganda illustrate the point:
USSR (Radio Moscow)
"The campaign (for the collection of signa-
tures) must be conducted under the slogan of in-
creased vigilance of the Soviet people against the
intrigues of the war instigators, as well as under
the sign of the mobilization of the efforts of the
Soviet people for the further strengthening of the
might of our Motherland and of winning further
successes in their peaceful constructive labors."
All Soviet people will respond as one man to the
appeal of the Soviet peace committee. It can
confidently be predicted that the campaign for the
collection of signatures will be turned into a
mighty demonstration of moral-political unity of
our people, their solidarity around the Party and
Government, the determination of the Soviet
people to wage an untiring struggle for world
peace against the imperialist warmongers.
Czechoslovakia (Radio Prague)
The statement of the central committee of the
National Front calls on all the Czechoslovak
July 11, 1955
81
people to fulfill their patriotic duty as conscious
peace defenders and sign the appeal of the World
Peace Council.
The statement of the central committee of the
National Front reads "Our struggle for peace is
linked with diligent work, with the efforts to carry
out the great tasks of the development of the na-
tional economy in both industry and agriculture.
Diligence in work, unselfishness, and the carrying
out of working tasks is the most effective form of
support for the struggle for the preservation of
world peace.
"We call on the citizens of the Republic to use
all their strength, abilities, and skill in carrying
out their tasks in the Socialist construction of the
country. Each job well done, each job done on
time, every improvement in production methods
can be considered worthwhile contributions by our
people to the struggle for peace and against the
plans for atomic war. By earnest daily attention
to work, the defense capacity of our republic will
be strengthened."
"On the occasion of the signing of the appeal,
workers in Slovakia have made 167,109 pledges
chiefly directed at raising agricultural and in-
dustrial production."
Communist China (Radio Moscow and Radio
Peiping)
"The collection of signatures to the appeal has
become a nationwide campaign in China and one
which is closely linked with the vital problems of
safeguarding the security of our country and with
the ardent desire to liberate Taiwan. We link the
collection of signatures with our struggle for the
liberation of Taiwan because those who seek to
occupy Taiwan — which has been our territory
from time immemorial — are also the chief insti-
gators in the preparation of atomic war."
"In response to the appeal of the World Peace
Council, the Hopei Provincial Federation of Trade
Unions and the Hopei Committee of the China
New Democratic League called on workers and
youths in the province to actively take part in
the signature campaign against the use of atomic
weapons. They also called for fulfillment of pro-
duction assignments to support the liberation of
Taiwan and peaceful uses of atomic energy."
The positive affirmation demanded of the citi-
zens is illustrated in a speech of Professor Gyorgy
Lukacs at the Hungarian Fourth National Peace
Congress charging the intellectuals with ". . .
showing a very formalistic attitude toward the
peace movement." They signed but, according to
him, took no active part in the campaign, did not
demonstrate to the world that the Hungarian
people are free and prosperous, that the Hungar-
ian Government is for peace and that it is sup-
ported by millions of Hungarian people. There
is little doubt that the act of signing is little
more than a "formal" act not only for the intel-
lectuals, but for others and not only in Hungary
but in the entire Communist orbit as well.
The success of the present Communist peace
campaign in non-Communist areas will vary
directly with its ability to involve non-Commu-
nists. This point is made most clearly in an
enlightening article about Communist organiza-
tional techniques written by Emilio Sereni, a
leading Italian Communist functionary. (For a
Las fin;/ Peace, for a Peoples' Democracy ! March
11, 1955, p. 5.) Sereni says that
. . . for a Communist leader to do successful work in
this campaign means that he must be able to do more than
muster the maximum number of Communists in the local
or provincial peace committee as canvassers ; above all,
it means that he has to draw into this work the greatest
possible number of Socialist comrades, of non-party
people and members of other parties, whether or not
they belong to any of the various mass organizations.
It is only in this way that the peace movement can
impress all citizens as a movement of the broadest politi-
cal scope. . . .
The United States has of course been actively
engaged throughout the years since the war, in
company with other nations, in seeking practical
means of control of the production of atomic weap-
ons. The many complex aspects of this impor-
tant matter are constantly under study toward the
end of providing for ourselves and all mankind
in this nuclear age a tolerable security. Explora-
tion into the peaceful uses of atomic energy is pro-
viding a rich field of activity with promises of
great benefit to man's physical standard of living
and, even more importantly, to his spiritual and
moral progress in learning how to utilize a force
of potential mass destruction for the purposes
of wide human advancement. In these studies
and in international negotiations, this Govern-
ment, sharing the desire of all men of good will
for the establishment of peace, but mindful of the
tragically illusory nature of any efforts purport-
ing to be directed toward that end while actually
82
Department of State Bulletin
aimed against the cause of freedom and human
rights, is contributing its continuing efforts.
There are evidences that in view of increasing
public awareness of the spurious nature of the
"peace" aims of the World Peace Council, its mask
of legitimacy and respectability is becoming in-
creasingly difficult to retain. As a particularly
pertinent example, its exploitation in the interests
of the Communist Party of the natural deep desire
of all peoples for peace is detected and denounced
in an editorial published in the Helsinki news-
paper "Ilta Sanomat" of April 21, 1955, of which
the following are excerpts in translation :
At the moment there is being prepared a new demon-
stration in the name of world peace, to take place at
Helsinki in the latter weeks of May. It is organized by
Communists led by the World Peace Council, having
Vienna as its domicile. . . . The preservation of world
peace is a matter for all people of the world, it is the
cause of all humanity. It is nobody's monopoly, as certain
circles at present believe, and least of all can it become
a propaganda weapon under the disguise of which prep-
aration is made for new unrest and a new war.
Sincerely yours,
Thrttston B. Morton
Assistant Secretary
MR. POWELL'S REPLY
June 6, 1955
Dear Mr. Morton: Thank you for your May
27th communication in which you furnished back-
ground information on the World Peace Council.
Your attention to this matter is appreciated and
I will abide by your advice.
Very truly yours,
Adam Clayton Powell, Jr.
Metriber of Congress
Exchangee Denied Permanent
Residence Immigration Status
Message from the President to the Senate x
I return herewith, without my approval, S. 143,
for the relief of Kurt Glaser.
The bill would accord permanent residence im-
migration status to a native of Czechoslovakia
who entered this country in July 1951 from
'Reprinted from S. Doc. 47, 84th Cong., 1st sess.
Austria as an exchange visitor under one of the
programs authorized by the United States Infor-
mation and Educational Exchange Act of 1948.
All of the exchange programs are founded upon
good faith. We can maintain them as effective
instruments for promoting international under-
standing and good will only if we insist that the
participants honor their commitments to observe
the conditions of the exchange in the same way
that they expect the United States to honor its
obligations to them. On the one hand, exchange
aliens must return to the country from which they
came. On the other hand, the United States must
not permit either immediate reentry or other eva-
sion of the return rule. Otherwise, the countries
from which our exchange visitors come will real-
ize little or no benefit from the training and ex-
perience received in the United States, and we
shall fail to promote good will toward and better
understanding of our way of life.
Unfortunately, the United States Information
and Educational Exchange Act does not specifi-
cally obligate exchange personnel to return to the
country from which admitted and to remain there
for a minimum period before being eligible to re-
gain admission to the United States. Adminis-
trative requirements have been imposed to com-
pensate for this lack of a specific statutory require-
ment. Within the last year, however, a number
of cases have arisen in which humanitarian and
equitable considerations have argued so per-
suasively against imposing such a requirement
that the Congress has been willing to consider and
to enact a number of private bills to adjust the
status of exchange personnel. By permitting them
to remain in the United States for permanent
residence, these bills have granted them immigra-
tion status without regard to the normal proce-
dures under our immigration laws.
Up to the present time, most of the circum-
stances which have led to the enactment of each
bill have been exceptional. Even though I have
recognized that the principle underlying each bill
was at variance with the basic concept and phil-
osophy of the exchange programs, I have not been
willing to require deportation at the possible risk
of creating undue hardship and, in several cases,
of jeopardizing the safety of the individual
concerned.
Such considerations are not present in the case
of Mr. Glaser. I am satisfied that both he and
his sponsor understood their obligations to ter-
July 11, 1955
83
minate his stay. In fact, the State Department's
records indicate that a basic purpose of the spon-
soring company in seeking exchange visitors was
to train foreign engineers in the company's spe-
cialty in cooperation with the International
Center of the University of Louisville. Further-
more, certification was signed by the vice president
of the company in which the following appears :
An attempt will be made to insure, insofar as possible,
that any exchange visitor coming under the program of
the sponsoring agency will adhere to the conditions under
which he was admitted to the United States and will
depart from the United States on completion of the pur-
pose of the visit.
Finally, there is no evidence that a return to
Austria will work any hardship on either the
company or Mr. Glaser beyond that of disrupting
an association which has proved productive, use-
ful, friendly, and profitable.
Under the circumstances, therefore, I feel it is
my duty to disapprove this bill and at the same
time to recommend enactment by the Congress
of a clear statutory requirement that exchange
personnel return home and remain there for a
minimum period before being eligible to reenter
the United States for permanent residence. Such
provisions of law will protect the purposes of the
exchange program, will prevent unjustifiable eva-
sion of immigration procedures, and will establish
legislative policy to guide the committees of Con-
gress in taking action on future private bills
which would set aside the general law. Legisla-
tion for this purpose has been forwarded to the
Congress by the Department of State this week.
I urge its prompt consideration.
Dwight D. Eisenhower.
The White House, June 3, 1955.
TREATY INFORMATION
Technology Agreements With Greece,
Netherlands, and Norway
Press release 365 dated Jime 17
The Secretary of State announced on June 17
the signing of agreements with Greece, the Neth-
erlands, and Norway to facilitate the exchange of
patent rights and technical information for de-
fense purposes.
The agreement with Greece was signed at
Athens on June 16. The agreement with Norway
was signed at Oslo on April 6 and the agreement
with the Netherlands at The Hague on April 29.
The agreement with the Netherlands is in force
only provisionally until the Government of the
United States is notified that the approval con-
stitutionally required in the Netherlands has been
obtained.
These bilateral agreements are expected to
foster the exchange of technology for defense
purposes between the governments and between
the private industries of the respective contract-
ing countries. Thus they should prove of recipro-
cal benefit in providing for national defense and
in contributing to the mutual defense of the North
Atlantic Treaty area.
The agreements with Norway, the Netherlands,
and Greece are the latest to be signed to date of a
series being negotiated with the Nato countries
and with Japan. Other agreements of this nature
have been signed with Italy, 1 the United King-
dom, 2 and Belgium. 3
The agreements recognize that privately owned
technology should, to the greatest extent prac-
ticable, be exchanged through commercial agree-
ments between owners and users. They also
stipulate that rights of private owners of patents
and technical information should be fully recog-
nized and protected in accordance with laws ap-
plicable to such rights. Other provisions are
intended to assure fair treatment of private own-
ers when they deal directly with a foreign govern-
ment and in cases in which private information
communicated through government channels
might be used or disclosed without authorization.
The agreements also provide for the establishment
of arrangements by which owners of patentable
inventions placed under secrecy by one govern-
ment may obtain comparable protection in the
other country.
The agreements also provide as a general rule
that government-owned inventions shall be inter-
changed for defense purposes on a royalty-free
basis.
1 Oct. 3, 1902 ; provisionally in force.
2 Jan. 19, 1953. For text see Treaties and Other Inter-
national Acts Series 2773.
8 Bulletin of Nov. 8, 1954, p. 712.
84
Department of State Bulletin
Each of the agreements provides for the estab-
lishment of a Technical Property Committee to
be composed of a representative of each govern-
ment. These committees are charged with gen-
eral responsibility for considering and making
recommendations on any matters relating to the
agreements brought before them by either govern-
ment either on their own behalf or on behalf of
their nationals. One of the specific functions of
the committee is to make recommendations to the
governments, either in particular cases or in gen-
eral, concerning disparities in their laws affecting
the compensation of owners of patents and tech-
nical information.
The U.S. representative to the Technical Prop-
erty Committees in Europe is assigned to the staff
of the Defense Adviser, U.S. Mission to the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization and European Re-
gional Organizations (Usro), 2 Rue St. Florentin,
Paris.
Policy guidance for the U.S. representatives on
the Technical Property Committees is provided by
the Interagency Technical Property Committee
for Defense, chaired by the Department of
Defense and including representatives of the
Departments of State, Justice, and Commerce; the
Foreign Operations Administration ; and the Gov-
ernment Patents Board. This committee is
assisted by an industry advisory group repre-
senting major sectors of American industry con-
cerned with defense production.
Military Assistance Agreement
With Guatemala
Press release 367 dated June 20
The Departments of State and Defense an-
nounced on June 20 that a bilateral military as-
sistance agreement was signed with the Govern-
ment of Guatemala on June 18.
This agreement is the twelfth of its kind to be
signed between the United States and a Latin
American Republic and is consistent with, and
conforms to, inter-American instruments already
in effect, such as the Inter- American Treaty of
Reciprocal Assistance (the Rio Treaty), the reso-
lution on Inter-American Military Cooperation
approved at the Washington Meeting of Foreign
Ministers of 1951, and the continuous planning of
the Inter- American Defense Board.
The provision of military grant aid by the
United States, in accordance with the agreements
concluded with Latin American countries, is au-
thorized by the Mutual Security Act and is in-
tended to assist in the development of the capabil-
ity of the countries concerned to join in perform-
ing missions important to the collective defense of
the Western Hemisphere.
Surplus Commodity Agreement
Signed With Colombia
Press release 386 dated June 24
Representatives of the Governments of Colom-
bia and the United States signed an agreement at
Bogota on June 23, 1955, for the sale and delivery
to Colombia of surplus agricultural commodities,
having a total value, including transportation
costs, of about $5,300,000.
These commodities will be made available pur-
suant to title I of the Agriculture Trade Develop-
ment and Assistance Act (Public Law 480, 83d
Congress) . This sale will help to meet deficiencies
in the normal Colombian supply of these com-
modities.
Payment for these commodities will be made in
Colombian currency, some of which has been set
aside for the use of the U.S. Government in the
development of agricultural markets in Colombia,
the payment of expenses of U.S. agencies in Co-
lombia, and the carrying out of student exchange
programs between the United States and
Colombia.
Current Actions
MULTILATERAL
Agriculture
International plant protection convention. Done at Rome
December 6, 1951. Entered into force April 3, 1952. 1
Ratification deposited: Guatemala, May 25, 1955.
Austria
State treaty for the re-establishment of an independent
and democratic Austria. Signed at Vienna May 15,
1955. 2
Ratification deposited: Austria, June 14, 1955.
Ratified by the President: June 24, 1955.
Ratification deposited: United States, July 9, 1955.
1 Not in force for the United States.
2 Not in force.
July 11, 1955
85
Narcotic Drugs
Protocol for limiting and regulating the cultivation of the
poppy plant, the production of, international and whole-
sale trade in, and use of opium. Dated at New York
June 23, 1953. 2
Ratification deposited: Philippines, June 1, 1955.
Postal Matters
Universal postal convention, with final protocol, annex,
regulations of execution, and provisions regarding air-
mail and final protocol thereto. Signed at Brussels
July 11, 1952. Entered into force July 1, 1953. TIAS
2800.
Ratification deposited : Poland, June 3, 1955.
BILATERAL
Canada
Agreement amending the agreement of November 4 and 8,
1952, as amended (TIAS 2503 and 2810), regarding
communication facilities in the vicinity of Stephenville,
Newfoundland. Effected by exchange of notes at
Ottawa March 31 and June 8, 1955. Entered into force
June 8, 1955.
China
Agreement amending the annex to the agreement of May
14, 1954, as amended (TIAS 2979 and 3215), relating
to the loan of small naval craft to China. Effected by
exchange of notes at Taipei June 18, 1955. Entered into
force June 18, 1955.
Colombia
Agricultural commodities agreement pursuant to title I
of Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act
of 1954 (68 Stat. 454, 455). Signed at Bogota June 23,
1955. Entered into force June 23, 1955.
Ecuador
Reciprocal trade agreement. Signed at Quito August 6,
193S. Modified by exchange of notes at Quito March 2,
1942. 53 Stat. (Pt. 3) 1951 and 56 Stat. 1472.
Termination by the United States postponed:* July 8,
1955.
Greece
Agreement amending the educational exchange program
agreement of April 23, 1948, as amended (TIAS 1751
2 Not in force.
3 By a note of July S, 1955, the United States withdrew
its notice of termination given Jan. 18, 1955, which would
have terminated the agreement on July IS, 1955. However,
the United States intends to give a new notice of termina-
tion on July 18, 1955, which, by the provisions of article
XIX, will terminate the agreement on Jan. IS, 1956,
thereby providing, in effect, a 6 months* postponement of
the termination of the agreement.
Correction
Bulletin of July 4, 1955, page 37 — In the entry
under Austria on Senate advice and consent to rati-
fication, the date should be June 17, 1955.
and 3037). Effected by exchange of notes at Athens
March 12 and June 4, 1955. Entered into force June 4,
1955.
Guatemala
Military assistance agreement. Signed at Guatemala
June 18, 1955. Entered into force June 18, 1955.
Honduras
Agreement providing for investment guaranties author-
ized by section 413 (b) (4) of Mutual Security Act of
1954 (68 Stat. 846-847). Effected by exchange of notes
at Tegucigalpa April 22 and June 10, 1955. Entered
into force June 10, 1955.
Israel
Supplementary agreement to the agricultural commodities
agreement of April 29, 1955. Signed at Washington June
15, 1955. Entered into force June 15, 1955.
Japan
Agreement on agricultural commodities, with agreed offi-
cial minutes and exchange of notes. Signed at Tokyo
May 31, 1955.
Entered into force: June 25, 1955 (date of receipt by the
United States of Japanese approval).
Norway
Agreement amending the agreement of May 25, 1949, as
amended (TIAS 2000 and 3118), establishing the educa-
tional exchange program. Effected by exchange of notes
at Oslo June 15, 1955. Entered into force June 15, 1955.
Syria
Air transport agreement. Signed at Damascus April 28,
1947. 1
Entered into force: June 21, 1955 (date the United
States given notification of approval by Syria).
Yugoslavia
Agreement amending the surplus agricultural commodi-
ties agreement of January 5, 1955 (TIAS 3167). Ef-
fected by exchange of notes at Belgrade May 12, 1955.
Entered into force May 12, 1955.
Agreement relating to the disposition of redistributable
and excess military assistance property in Yugoslavia.
Effected by exchange of notes signed at Belgrade May
19 and 22, 1955. Entered into force May 22, 1955.
4 Agreement has been in force provisionally since Apr.
28, 1947.
86
Department of Sfofe Bulletin
July 11, 1955 Ind
Asia. Treatment of Far Eastern Questions at Heads of
Government Meeting 50
Atomic Energy
Agreements With Belgium, Canada, U.K. on Civil Uses of
Atomic Energy (Eisenhower statement) .... 58
Atomic Agreements for Mutual Defense With Canada and
U.K. (texts of agreements and letters) 59
Atoms-for-Peace Agreement With Turkey (text of
agreement) 55
Data on Atomic Radiation (Lodge) 54
U.S. Delegations to International Conferences (U.N. Con-
ference on Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy) ... 64
Austria. Exchangee Denied Permanent Residence Immi-
gration Status (Presidential message) 83
Belgium. Agreements With Belgium, Canada, U.K. on
Civil Uses of Atomic Energy (Eisenhower state-
ment) 58
Burma. Visit of Prime Minister U Nu (Dulles) .... 50
Canada
Agreements With Belgium, Canada, U.K. on Civil Uses
of Atomic Energy (Eisenhower statement) ... 58
Atomic Agreements for Mutual Defense With Canada and
U.K. (texts of agreements and letters) 59
China. Treatment of Far Eastern Questions at Heads of
Government Meeting (Dulles) 50
Claims and Property. Application for Proceedings Against
U.S.S.R. for Destruction of B-29 off Hokkaido in
1952 (text of application) 65
Colombia. Surplus Commodity Agreement Signed With
Colombia 85
Communism. World Peace Council (Morton and Powell) . 79
Congress, The
Exchangee Denied Permanent Residence Immigration
Status (Presidential message) 83
Geneva Conventions for Protection of War Victims
(Murphy and Dulles) 69
World Peace Council (Morton and Powell) 79
Economic Affairs. Surplus Commodity Agreement Signed
With Colombia 85
Educational Exchange. Exchangee Denied Permanent
Residence Immigration Status (Presidential mes-
sage) 83
Europe
Delegation to Heads of Government Meeting at Geneva . 49
European Security System (Dulles) 53
France. U.S., U.K., and France Hold Talks With Yugo-
slavia (text of joint communique) 49
Germany
German Reunification (Dulles) 51
Germany in the Free World (Murphy) 43
Greece. Technology Agreements With Greece, Nether-
lands, and Norway 84
Guatemala. Military Assistance Agreement With Guate-
mala 85
Health, Education, and Welfare. Geneva Conventions for
Protection of War Victims (Murphy and Dulles) . . 69
Immigration and Naturalization. Exchangee Denied Per-
manent Residence Immigration Status (Presidential
message) 83
International Organizations and Meetings. U.S. Delegations
to International Conferences (U.N. Conference on
Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy) 64
Military Affairs. Application for Proceedings Against
U.S.S.R. for Destruction of B-29 off Hokkaido in
1952 (text of application) 65
Mutual Security
Atomic Agreements for Mutual Defense With Canada and
U.K. (texts of agreements and letters) 59
Military Assistance Agreement With Guatemala ... 85
Netherlands. Technology Agreements With Greece, Nether-
lands, and Norway 84
Norway. Technology Agreements With Greece, Nether-
lands, and Norway 84
Presidential Documents
Agreements With Belgium, Canada, U.K. on Civil Uses of
Atomic Energy 58
Exchangee Denied Permanent Residence Immigration
Status 83
Treaty Information
Agreements With Belgium, Canada, U.K. on Civil Uses of
Atomic Energy (Eisenhower statement) .... 58
Atomic Agreements for Mutual Defense With Canada and
U.K. (texts of agreements and letters) 59
Atoms-for-Peace Agreement With Turkey (text of agree-
ment) 55
Current Actions 85
Geneva Conventions for Protection of War Victims
(Murphy and Dulles) 69
Military Assistance Agreement With Guatemala ... 85
Surplus Commodity Agreement Signed With Colombia . 85
Technology Agreements With Greece, Netherlands, and
Norway 84
e X Vol. XXXIII, No. 837
Turkey. Atoms-for-Peace Agreement With Turkey (text
of agreement) 55
U.S.S.R.
Application for Proceedings Against U.S.S.R. for Destruc-
tion of B-29 off Hokkaido in 1952 (text of applica-
tion) 65
Bering Sea Plane Incident (Dulles) 52
United Kingdom
Agreements With Belgium, Canada, U.K. on Civil Uses of
Atomic Energy (Eisenhower statement) .... 58
Atomic Agreements for Mutual Defense With Canada and
U.K. (texts of agreements and letters) 59
U.S., U.K., and France Hold Talks With Yugoslavia
(text of joint communique) 49
United Nations
Assessment of San Francisco Meeting (Dulles) .... 50
Data on Atomic Radiation (Lodge) 54
Viet-Nam. Elections in Viet-Nam (Dulles) 50
Yugoslavia. U.S., U.K., and France Hold Talks With
Yugoslavia (text of joint communique) 49
Name Index
Dulles. Secretary 50, 51, 52, 53, 71
Eisenhower, President 58, 59, 62, 83
Lodge, Henry Cabot. Jr 54
Morton, Thruston B 79
Murphy, Robert 43, 69
Nu, U 50
Powell, Clayton, Jr 83
Wilson, Charles E 59, 62
Check List of Department of State
Press Releases: June 27-July 3
Releases may be obtained from the News Division,.
Department of State, Washington 25, D. C.
Press releases issued prior to June 27 which appear in
this issue of the Bulletin are Nos. 311 of June 3, 326 of
June 7, 365 of June 17, 367, 369, and 370 of June 20, and
3S6 and 387 of June 24.
Subject
9th Foreign Service Selection Boards.
Note to U.S.S.R. on Fr. Bissonnette.
Dulles: assessment of San Francisco meet-
ing.
Plans for visiting Soviet agriculturists.
Delegation of Soviet agriculturists.
Dulles : elections in Viet-Xam.
Dulles : visit of Prime Minister TJ Nu.
Dulles : Far Eastern questions.
Dulles : German reunification.
Dulles : Bering Sea plane incident.
Dulles : European security system.
Termination date of Ecuadoran trade agree-
ment.
U.S.-Swiss supplementary trade agreement.
Delegation to ECOSOC (rewrite).
Educational exchange.
Renegotiation of tariff concessions with
Austria and France.
Public exhibit of Great Seal.
U.S.-German mutual defense assistance
agreement.
Dulles : establishment of ICA.
Nonimmigrant visa regulations.
Note to U.S.S.R. on documentation for non-
official visitors.
Atoms-for-peace agreement with Sweden.
Dulles : exhibit of Great Seal.
Atoms-for-peace agreement with Peru.
U.S.-French educational exchange agreement.
Atoms-for-peace agreement with Korea.
Inter-American Bank for Economic Develop-
ment.
No.
Date
f391
6/27
f302
6/28
393
6/28
*394
6/28
*395
6/28
396
6/28
397
6/28
39S
6/28
399
6/2S
400
6/28
401
6/28
t402
6/28
t403
6/29
t404
6/30
*405
6/30
,406
6/30
*407
6/30
t408
6/30
1409
6/30
t410
7/1
T411
7/1
*412
7/1
t413
7/1
*414
7/1
,415
7/1
*416
7/1
t417
7/1
*Not printed.
tHeld for a later issue of the Bulletin.
Department
of
State
Order Form
To: Supt. of Documents
Govt. Printing Office
Washington 25, D.C.
Enclosed find:
$.
(cash, check, or
money order).
United States
Government Printing Office
DIVISION OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS
Washington 25, D. C.
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE TO AVOID
PAYMENT OF POSTAGE, S300
(GPOI
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy
Pub. 5888
150
An illustrated layman's guide to "The Atoms-for-Peace Pro-
gram" to which President Eisenhower has committed the
Nation, pledging it before the United Nations General As-
sembly "to devote its entire heart and mind to find the way
by which the miraculous inventiveness of man shall not be
dedicated to his death, but consecrated to his life."
The pamphlet offers a concise account of the history and
development of the peaceful uses of atomic energy. These
are some of the subjects treated :
The Promise of Atomic Energy
The Origin of the Atoms-for-Peace Program
The Background of the U.S. Proposals
The United Nations Atoms-for-Peace Resolution
The International Atomic Energy Agency — its origin,
development, status, and future activities
The International Conference on the Peaceful Uses of
Atomic Energy
Education and Training in Atomic Reactor Technology —
which includes a description of the reactor school at
Argonne National Laboratory and Aec's school for
isotope study at Oak Ridge
Copies of Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy may be purchased
for 15 cents from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C.
Please send me copies of Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy.
Name:
Street Address:
City, Zone, and State:
~>RY
*JAe/ zileficwtwient/ ,cfl trtafa
r ol. XXXIII, No. 838
July 18, 1955
HOW WE WORK WITH OTHER NATIONS • by John
F. Simmons, Chief of Protocol 91
OPENING OF THE PUBLIC EXHIBIT OF THE SEAL
OF THE UNITED STATES • Remarks by Secretary
Dulles 94
AMERICAN-ISRAEL FRIENDSHIP • Address by Attorney
General Brownell 97
IMPORTANCE OF INTERNATIONAL TRAVEL IN
ADVANCING WORLD PEACE • Address by Secretary
of Commerce Weeks 106
DEPARTMENT'S VIEWS ON SUGAR LEGISLATION •
Statement by Assistant Secretary Holland 120
VISIT OF U NU, PRIME MINISTER OF BURMA
Address to Senate 95
Address to House of Representatives 95
Joint Statement by Prime Minister U iVu and President
Eisenhower 96
THE FOREIGN TRADE POLICY OF THE UNITED
STATES • by Ben H. Thibodeaux 110
For index see inside back cover
Boston Public Library
Superintendent of Documents
AUG 1 1 1955
'■«»*» O*
bulletin
Vol. XXXIII,No.838 • Publication 5927
July 18, 1955
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents
U.S. Government Printing Office
Washington 25, D.C.
Price:
62 Issues, domestic $7.50, foreign $10.25
Single copy. 20 cents
The printing of this publication has
been approved by the Director of the
Bureau of the Budget (January 19, 1955).
Note: Contents of this publication are not
copyrighted and items contained herein may
be reprinted. Citation of the Department
or State Bulletin as the source will be
appreciated.
The Department of State BULLETIN,
a weekly publication issued by the
Public Services Division, provides the
public and interested agencies of
the Government icith information on
developments in the field of foreign
relations and on the work of the De-
partment of State and the Foreign
Service. The BULLETIN includes
selected press releases on foreign pol-
icy, issued by the White House and
the Department, and statements and
addresses made by the President and
by the Secretary of State and other
officers of the Department, as well as
special articles on various phases of
international affairs and the func-
tions of the Department. Informa-
tion is included concerning treaties
and international agreements to
which the United States is or may
become a party and treaties of gen-
eral international interest.
Publications of the Department, as
well as legislative material in the field
of international relations, are listed
currently.
How We Work With Other Nations
by John F. Simmons
Chief of Protocol x
Any meeting of the National 4-H Club is of
interest to those of us who work professionally
in international relations. This silver anniver-
sary of your camp, however, has a special signifi-
cance. It is the culmination of 25 years of prac-
tical application to the tasks of citizenship and
community service. As such it affirms the values,
and deepens the meaning, of the principles our
Nation has chosen to follow in the conduct of its
foreign relations.
American foreign policy is based on the char-
acter of the American people, on the use they make
of their heritage of cultural and political free-
dom, and on their understanding of the actions
necessary to protect their way of life. Years ago
a Secretary of State defined it very simply.
American foreign policy, he said, is the projection
of the will of the American people beyond the
borders of our country. What is basic here is an
informed citizenry, a citizenry on the alert for
problems and dangers and with practice in ap-
proaching them in a human, American way.
You can understand that I consider the record
celebrated in your silver anniversary a reassuring
one. As it happens, I have spent more than half
of my life in the United States Foreign Service.
I know that I draw strength and confidence from
your example. When the Young America which
you represent takes such an active interest in good
government and in promoting friendly relations
with foreign governments and foreign peoples, I
have the feeling that our future will be in good
hands. I am confident that more and more Amer-
icans will find, as you have found at an early age,
1 Address made before the 25th anniversary meeting
of the National 4-H Club of America at Washington,
D. C, on June 17 (press release 364).
July 78, J 955
the rich satisfactions of working personally to im-
prove our international relations.
In this regard there is much to be done. It is
easy, so dangerously easy, to forget how important
our personal attitudes are to the projection of
American foreign policy. In the rush of modern
life, many of us are apt to adopt a parochial at-
titude toward foreigners. We have so much to do
here at home that foreign relations have a tend-
ency to become abstract and far away from our
everyday lives. Without a continuing effort on
our part, we could lapse readily into a state of
indifference toward our dealings with other lands.
To an internationally minded group such as
yours, I need not expand on the difficulties that
would be created by that state of mind if it became
general throughout our country. We know that
in the world of today there is no such thing as
self-sufficiency. Our well-being depends upon the
good will of other nations, as theirs depends upon
us. This little planet, the third from the sun, has
shrunk under the pressure of modern technology
to the point where all peoples are neighbors, for
better or for worse. It behooves us to do every-
thing within our power to make ourselves good
neighbors. For a long time to come, human sym-
pathy and personal friendliness will have high
values in our international affairs.
When I was asked to talk to you on "How We
Work With Other Nations," I felt alarmed at the
scope of the subject. How could so much be cov-
ered in so short a time? Then I found encour-
agement in the memory of something that hap-
pened a few years ago. I was rummaging
through some old family papers in my home and
ran across an English composition notebook of my
great-grandfather, written when he was 14. This
notebook covered a number of subjects which my
revered ancestor did not hesitate to dispose of
91
completely within the space of 2 or 3 pages. One
of these subjects bore the modest title, "The Cre-
ation and Subsequent Events."
Making Foreign Policy
Properly chastened by the comparison, let me
turn now to my little subject of "How We Work
With Other Nations." The basic answer, of
course, is that the President is the man who makes
the decisions about our Nation's foreign policy.
Only he may present programs to the Congress or
decide which countries we shall recognize diplo-
matically and which countries we shall not rec-
ognize. At his right hand is the Secretary of
State, his chief adviser on foreign affairs and the
highest ranking member of the Cabinet.
Secretary Dulles and his Department formulate
and plan the broad aspects of new policy pro-
grams. He and his staff take the national policies
approved by the President and give them the spe-
cific shape of foreign policies that can be put into
action. Each new policy decision must be fitted
into a body of previous decisions which have been
the basis of agreement between the United States
and other nations. As you know, the treaties and
other agreements to which the United States is a
party are the legal framework within which our
foreign policy operates.
Mo9t of the detailed action on foreign policy is
also carried out by the Department of State — with
the aid and cooperation, I hasten to add, of more
than a score of major departments and agencies
in the executive branch. Among the Depart-
ment's functions are those of negotiating treaties
and agreements, of representing our Nation at
other seats of government throughout the world,
of organizing and taking part in international
conferences, and of handling day-to-day business
with foreign governments. The latter function is
carried out by our Foreign Service in 76 foreign
countries.
We have in Washington 69 embassies and 10
legations. This total of 79 countries represented
here exceeds by three the number of countries to
which we have accredited ambassadors and min-
isters. The apparent discrepancy is due to the
fact that the three Baltic States of Estonia, Lat-
via, and Lithuania, still recognized by us, no
longer enjoy an independent status, although each
of the three still maintains a legation in this
country.
Maintaining Friendly Relations
Our friendly relations with other countries are
vital. How do we maintain those relations? We
have, of course, our own Foreign Service, a group
of devoted men and women who have dedicated
their lives to the service of their country. They
represent the frontline of our foreign policy. It
is they who do the spade work and who deal di-
rectly with the day-by-day problems which arise.
They submit to Washington their reports and ap-
praisals of conditions abroad. Their activities
cover many fields, including political and eco-
nomic reporting, cultural relations, and technical
aid.
Then we have the United Nations, about which
the Secretary of State said, in a recent speech,
The people of the United States believe wholeheartedly
in the purposes and the principles set out in the Charter
of the United Nations. That document marks a mile-
stone in the understanding of the nature of peace. It
recognizes that peace is not a passive concept but a call
to action. It is not enough to dislike war and to denounce
it. War has been hated throughout the ages. Yet war
has been recurrent throughout the ages. One reason is
that men have never put into the winning of peace efforts
comparable to those which they put into the winning of
a war.
In the Western Hemisphere the Organization of
American States has given a marvelous example
of Western Hemisphere cooperation and friend-
ship. It has shown how neighbors can live like
neighbors and how disputes may be settled with-
out recourse to war. This organization was based
upon a long tradition of cooperation for freedom
and peace in this hemisphere. Elsewhere we have
such recently organized entities as the Mutual
Security Program, the Pacific Charter, the Manila
Pact, the Southeast Asia Treaty, the North At-
lantic Treaty, the Rio de Janeiro Treaty, and
many others. These provide the machinery for
maintaining peace, based on strength, in many
parts of the world where Communist aggression
is not an abstraction but a reality to be faced.
One form of international cooperation which
is perhaps not so spectacular as others is our
program of cultural and educational exchanges
with other countries. This is on a reciprocal basis
and includes the sending abroad of an increasingly
large number of selected American students, pro-
fessors, and lecturers. This program is of vital
importance. It means that ever-increasing num-
bers of foreign people get to know and form
92
Department of State Bulletin
friendships with Americans. This type of ex-
change of persons, in our own case, is having won-
derful results in dispelling international sus-
picions and in building up an atmosphere abroad
which is a basis for maintaining peace. It is a
fine contribution to the friendship of the peoples
of the world.
That is the broad picture of how we work with
other nations. In no part of it do we get away
from people, from men and women who are loyal
to their homelands just as we are loyal to ours.
It has been my privilege for the past 5 years, as
Chief of Protocol, to deal on a day-by-day basis
with all the representatives of foreign nations who
are stationed here in Washington. Judging by
the fine caliber of this group and their staffs, it is
apparent that Washington must be considered by
the various countries represented here as a key
post in their diplomatic services. I have been
greatly privileged at the opportunity of dealing
with and forming friendships with such outstand-
ing personalities. It is they, together with our
own ambassadors, ministers, and consuls abroad,
who bear the main burden of carrying out the
intricate relations between foreign countries and
the United States.
Visits of Foreign Officials
An important part of our foreign relations con-
sists in the visits to this country of a growing num-
ber of high foreign officials. Within the past 5
years such visitors have included the reigning
monarchs of Greece, Iran, Netherlands; the
Crown Prince of Japan ; the Governor General of
Canada; Princess (now Queen) Elizabeth of
Great Britain; Crown Prince (now King) Saud
al Saud of Saudi Arabia; the Queen Mother of
Great Britain ; Chancellor Adenauer of Germany ;
and the Prime Ministers of most of the countries
with which we have friendly relations. Each of
these visits has been instrumental in improving
our close ties with other parts of the world.
The most recent of these visits, which is taking
place during the present week, is that of Chan-
cellor Adenauer. I hope that you will permit me,
in connection with this visit, to recount to you
briefly a little-known historical incident. This
incident occurred in Cologne, Germany, in April
1933, while I was stationed there as American
Consul. Dr. Adenauer w 7 as the Mayor of Cologne
and was naturally a close personal friend of mine.
By way of background, Hitler had come into
power in January 1933, but the national flag of
Germany was still the red, black, and gold flag
now used. The swastika flag was adopted for
Hitler Germany only at a later date.
As I was driving to my office early on that April
morning, I noticed to my surprise that the four
towers of the Hohenzollern Railway Bridge over
the Rhine at Cologne displayed four swastika
Nazi flags. On inquiry, I found that they had
been placed there during the night by some Nazi
enthusiasts, who had apparently climbed up the
towers for that purpose. Dr. Adenauer, hearing
of this, lost no time in performing a most coura-
geous act. He had the flags removed, and he
issued immediately a public statement to the citi-
zens of Cologne, published in the local morning
press. The statement was moderate in tone. It
explained that the flags had been removed not
through disrespect to any German political party
but because he, as Mayor, would permit only the
German national flag to be flown over any bridge
in Cologne.
The party reaction was immediate. A group
of Nazi leaders served themselves on Mayor
Adenauer in his office at 11 o'clock that very morn-
ing. What they said to him and what he an-
swered have not come to light. What we know is
that he ceased being Mayor of Cologne that very
day and retired into the obscurity of a monastery
for the rest of the prewar and war period. This
incident, to my mind, illustrates the remarkable
character of the man whom the entire free world
now admires so greatly as an outstanding inter-
national leader.
People-to-People Diplomacy
I have been fortunate in making many other
fine friendships during my years in the Foreign
Service. I am deeply grateful for my opportu-
nities to do so, and, if you will think back with
me over what I have been saying to you, you will
know that that is the real reason why I have put
the conclusion of my speech first. International
relations comes down to people, for governments
are made up of people and agreements between
states can be achieved only through the human
beings who represent those states.
Many have the impression that protocol, my
present specialty, has to do merely with ritual and
correct manners at social functions. That impres-
sion is about as wrong as any impression can be.
July 18, 7955
93
Protocol among nations is rooted in a sound knowl-
edge of human relationships. It is basically prac-
tical and purposeful. It reflects mutual respect
and consideration. It is the mode of behavior
most favorable to the achievement of understand-
ing and cooperation.
The Protocol Staff of the Department of State
has the responsibility of seeing that all interna-
tional courtesies and formalities required of the
United States Government are properly met and
that they are carried out with consideration and
care and without unfortunate incident. As Chief
of that Staff I can assure you that this means meet-
ing the people of other lands with courtesy and
friendliness and sharing with them the mutual
respect of good manners.
I could wish for the young people of the 4-H
Club no better luck than the rich satisfactions I
have had through the use of that simple formula.
I hoj>e that you will remember it and make it a
part of your international programs.
U.S. Deposits Ratification
of Austrian State Treaty
Press release 424 dated July 9
The Charge d'Affaires ad interim of the Ameri-
can Embassy at Moscow, Walter N. Walmsley, Jr.,
on July 9 handed to the Deputy Foreign Minister
of the U. S. S. R, V. A. Zorin, the instrument of
ratification of the Austrian State Treaty of the
Government of the United States. 1 By this act
the United States has completed the process of
ratification of the treaty which was signed by
Austria, Britain, France, the U. S. S. R., and the
United States in Vienna on May 15, 1955. The
Senate of the United States approved the treaty
on June 17, and the instrument of ratification was
signed by President Eisenhower on June 24.
The Austrian State Treaty provides for the re-
establishment of an independent and democratic
Austria. Under article 38 of the treaty the Gov-
ernment of the U. S. S. R. was named as the de-
pository of the instruments of ratification. The
treaty comes into force immediately upon deposit
of these instruments by the five signatory powers.
1 For text of treaty, see Bulletin of June 6, 1955, p. 916.
94
Opening of the Public Exhibit of
the Seal of the United States
On July 1, in the lobby of the New State Build-
ing, Secretary Dulles opened the first public ex-
hibit of the Seal of the United States. Following
is the text of his remarks (press release Jfl3 dated
July 1).
This is a proud moment for me as Secretary of
State to participate in this commemoration of the
Seal of the United States. This Seal typifies the
continuity of all the basic qualities, the liberty
and welfare of man, the resolute search for peace
with freedom and justice, that have made our
country great.
In 17S9 the Secretary of State was designated by
the Congress as the keeper of the Seal of the
United States. So, from the very first year of the
Eepublic, the keeping of the Great Seal — as it is so
often called — has been entrusted to the safekeep-
ing of the Secretary of State. Thomas Jefferson
was the first to be responsible for the Seal. In
the course of the 166 years that have passed since
then, the Seal has been affixed to countless thou-
sands of documents, in strict accordance with the
Congressional Act of 17S9. A copy of that Act
of Congress is also on exhibit here today.
I would like to call attention to another docu-
ment of great historical interest likewise on ex-
hibit. That is the earliest known document on
which a Seal of the United States, the Confedera-
tion, was impressed, and is a commission dated
September 16, 1782, granting full power and au-
thority to Gen. George Washington to arrange
with the British for the exchange of prisoners of
war.
Beginning today the Seal will be on view here
in the State Department in a glass room specially
prepared for it on the north balcony of this lobby.
At a specified hour on each workday such docu-
ments as require the Seal will have it impressed
upon them in public view.
Over and above its practical and continuing pur-
pose, the Seal has, in the course of time, come to
be a symbol of the growth and stability of the
United States. All of us in the Department of
State take pride in the custodianship of the Seal
and the reminder that goes with it of our responsi-
bilities in safeguarding the future of our great
Nation.
Department of State Bulletin
Visit of U Nu, Prime Minister of Burma
U Nu, Prime Minister of Burma, made an offi-
cial visit to Washington from June 29 to July 3.
Following are the texts of his addresses before the
Senate and the House of Representatives on June
SO and a joint statement by the Prime Minister
and President Eisenhower released by the White
House on July 2.
ADDRESS TO SENATE >
Mr. President and members of the United States
Senate, it gives me very real pleasure to visit this
body, which for so long has stood as one of the
great symbols of government of the people, by the
people, and for the people.
As you know, I come to visit you from halfway
around the world.
We in Burma already feel very close to the
United States, and I have long wanted to get to
know you more intimately. This is the purpose
of my visit. While I am here I expect to see your
cities, your factories, and your farms, and to talk
with as many Americans as I can.
One reason why we in Burma feel a deep friend-
ship for America is that your experience in many
respects has been a shining example to us during
many years of our struggle for independence, as
well as in our effort to apply the principles of
democracy.
There are three aspects of your history that are
particularly well known to us, perhaps the more
so because they so strikingly parallel our own
brief history as a free, independent, and demo-
cratic nation.
The first of these parallels is that we were both
colonial possessions of the same empire, and both
had to struggle to win our right to self-govern-
ment. And I am happy to say that both of us
now live in friendship with our former landlord,
with whom I have just had a pleasant and con-
structive visit.
The second parallel is that both of our countries
adopted constitutions designed to secure personal
liberty to all of our peoples, to institute systems
of government by law, to provide the institutions
of democratic rule, and to insure political and
economic and social justice.
I dare to suggest that the leaders of our inde-
pendence movement were as familiar with the Con-
stitution of the United States as you yourselves.
I mention this not to boast, but to remind you
that the great document that was framed in Phila-
delphia nearly 175 years ago has served through
all the intervening time as a beacon to fighters for
freedom everywhere. And it shines as brightly
today as ever.
The third parallel I should like to mention is
that both of our nations adopted in their early
years an independent foreign policy, designed to
maintain the friendship of all nations and to avoid
big-power alliances. You are aware that this
policy of ours is not without its critics. Nor, for
that matter, was yours. Be that as it may, it does
offer another parallel between our early histories
as independent nations.
May I add, Mr. President, the fervent hope and
confident expectation that two nations that started
out in such similar fashion will continue along
parallel paths in friendship and cooperation.
Thank you.
ADDRESS TO HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES -
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House of Rep-
resentatives, I have just had the pleasure of talk-
ing briefly with your colleagues in the Senate. As
you know, we also have a bicameral legislature in
Burma ; but we adopted the parliamentary system
1 Reprinted from Cong. Rec, June 30, 1955, p. 8188.
July 78, 7955
■ Reprinted from Cong. Rec, June 30, 1955, p. 8240.
95
of government so that one of my duties as Prime
Minister is to serve as leader of the majority party
in our Chamber of Deputies. So it is a special
pleasure to stand here before the sister branch of
the United States Government.
I can tell your renowned Speaker that his repu-
tation as a parliamentarian has been known to me
for many years, and I must confess that I am
Gift to U.S. in Appreciation of
Sacrifices of Burma Campaign
The White House on June 29 released the follow-
ing letter to President Eisenhower from U Nu,
Prime Minister of Burma.
My dear Mr. President, The people and Govern-
ment of the Union of Burma remember with grati-
tude the valuable contribution made by the United
States towards the liberation of their country from
the Japanese militarist yoke. In particular they
recall the heroic sacrifices made by the gallant
members of the United States Armed Forces who
took part in the liberation campaign.
As a token of our appreciation of the sacrifices
made by these gallant men, I would ask you to accept
this cheque for five thousand dollars ($5,000.00),
the money to be used in some appropriate manner
for the benefit of the children of those who lost their
lives or were incapacitated in the Burma campaign.
Yours sincerely,
Mauno Nu,
Prime Minister of Burma
pleased that our majority in the Chamber of Depu-
ties is somewhat more substantial than his.
I promise you that my remarks will be far
more brief than they normally are before the
Chamber in Rangoon, but there is one thing that
I should like to mention because it makes me feel
very close to the United States. It is this : In the
very early days of our respective histories as inde-
pendent nations, even under the greatest stress, we
both maintained our faith in the democratic sys-
tem and in democratic institutions.
Like most fighters for independence, I studied
the history of the American Revolution and draw
sustenance from it. Therefore I am aware that
in the darkest days of your revolution there were
voices raised to advise you to forsake, for the time
being at least, the methods of democracy in favor
of some strong authority. But the founders of
your country did not yield their faith. They
dealt with the fearful, the apathetic, and even with
the traitors, according to democratic principles.
As you know, our new democracy in Burma was
seriously threatened by subversive revolt almost
as soon as it was born. Communists and anti-
Communists, both inspired from abroad, took up
arms against our Government. For a while it
looked as though all was lost. Like your revolu-
tionary leaders, we were advised to abandon the
principles of democracy in favor of strong-arm
methods. But I am proud to say that we kept
faith and stuck to the methods of democracy. We
also treated the fearful, the apathetic, and even
the traitors, according to democratic principles.
The history and experience of the founders of
your country, Mr. Speaker, helped us to keep the
faith during the darkest hours. For this, we
shall always be grateful to the United States of
America.
JOINT STATEMENT BY THE PRIME MINISTER OF
BURMA AND THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED
STATES
The Prime Minister of Burma, His Excellency
U Nu, has visited Washington for three days at
the invitation of President Eisenhower. The
President and the Prime Minister discussed many
matters of common concern and exchanged views
on current international problems.
The Prime Minister, the President and the Sec-
retary of State reviewed problems of peace and
security in Asia. They had a frank discussion of
the complex economic problems arising from the
existence of substantial surpluses of exportable
rice both in Burma — one of the world's leading
rice exporting countries — and in the United States.
Note was taken of the salutary influence of re-
ligion as exemplified by the Sixth Buddhist Synod
presently being held in Rangoon and attended by
leading Buddhist scholars from many nations.
The problem of imprisoned American fliers in
Communist China was reviewed.
These talks have been of special value in increas-
ing mutual understanding between Burma and the
United States. There is a wide area of agreement
and a traditional friendship between Burma and
the United States resting firmly upon certain
noble concepts to which both countries subscribe.
96
Department of State Bulletin
Our two peoples, those of the United States and
the Union of Burma, share two fundamental goals,
a peaceful world and a democratic way of life.
They reaffirmed their dedication to the ideal
of peace and friendly cooperation amongst na-
tions founded on international justice and mo-
rality. Both countries are deeply concerned with
a subject that is predominant in the minds of all
responsible world leaders today — the problem of
achieving peace with justice, a peace based upon
the liberty of human beings and the security of
nations.
Such a peace can best be achieved by loyal stead-
fast support for the Charter of the United Na-
tions. That is the surest and most practical ave-
nue along which to seek peace with justice in this
world. A patient striving to uphold the funda-
mental moral and religious beliefs underlying the
Charter provides the best hope for the fulfillment
of mankind's aspirations.
The Prime Minister, the President and the Sec-
retary of State deplored the conditions which force
the peoples of the world to divert their energies
and talents from a single-minded effort to improve
and expand those cultural and economic oppor-
tunities by which men can raise the levels of their
existence. They renewed their own determina-
tion to uphold the principles of the United Nations
in its unceasing effort to save mankind from the
scourge of future war.
American- Israel Friendship
by Herbert Brownell, Jr.
Attorney General of the United States 1
The theme of your convention — American-
Israel friendship — is one with which I believe an
overwhelming majority of our fellow Americans
would wish to be identified, for the task of creat-
ing understanding and promoting friendship be-
tween our country and other free nations through-
out the world is one of the supreme challenges to
Americans at this moment in our country's history.
If we are to discharge successfully the tremendous
responsibility which America has been called upon
to assume in our generation — the obligation to lead
the free world toward security, progress, and
peace— it is imperative that our life should be cor-
rectly interpreted to our friends of other lands
and that their hopes and aspirations should be
fully explained to us.
The young State of Israel stands high on the list
of nations whose friendship is of great importance
to the American Government and people. The
significance of that friendship is not to be meas-
ured by Israel's size and numbers, although that
country's strategic location and the high caliber of
its population are no doubt weighty factors which
must be recognized. It is the spirit that animates
1 Address made before the Zionist Organization of
America at Washington, D.C., on June 18.
Israel that is of primary importance to us. We
see in Israel a pilot plant of American ideas in an
area of the world that sorely needs these con-
cepts — a striving after goals that are similar to
our own.
Similarity of Legal Systems
I recently found striking evidence of this in a
field in which I find myself continually occupied,
the area of constitutional law. I have had occa-
sion to read a fascinating account of four cases,
involving important constitutional questions of
law, which recently came before the Supreme
Court of Israel. The central fact that emerged
from this paper by Judge Cheshin, Deputy Presi-
dent of Israel's Supreme Court, is that Israel's
still-evolving system of justice not only shows a
close affinity for our American system but often
utilizes opinions delivered throughout the years
by the Supreme Court of the United States. No
one who is close to the legal procedures of our
Nation can fail to be both proud and inspired
by what I have just described. This trend
augurs well for the citizens of Israel and the
protection of their rights. It also reflects the
July 18, 7955
97
continued vigor and health of our American legal
system.
As the chief legal officer of this country, I am
naturally interested in comparative law. I am
mindful that the Talmudic law has contributed
to our own. During all the time that the Jews
formed communities in one country after another,
often only to be expelled, the elaboration of the
Talmud continued. This was, and is, a manifes-
tation of the creative spirit of Israel.
I am also aware — sympathetically aware — of
the complex structure of the law in Israel, con-
sisting, as it does, of the law of the old Ottoman
Empire, the British mandatory law, and the laws
enacted by the new State. In addition, each
religious community applies its own laws to all
matters affecting personal status, such as mar-
riage and divorce, guardianship, and alimony.
This complicated structure of laws is undoubt-
edly cumbersome. The Government of Israel
long has recognized the necessity of developing a
new legal system for Israel. It is approaching
this momentous task in a manner which has im-
pressed me from the beginning and which I have
spoken of before. It manifests not only a cre-
ative spirit but also a flexibility which is char-
acteristic of youth, strength, and growth.
About 3 years ago the Ministry of Justice of
Israel joined with Harvard Law School in the
establishment of the Harvard Law School-Israel
Cooperative Research project, supported by vol-
untary funds. Harvard University, on its part,
has made available the resources of its outstanding
Library of Comparative Law and the scholarly
advice of its staff. But it has done more. It has
enlisted the active participation of scholars from
many other leading American law schools and is
expanding their participation. On its part,
Israel has provided representatives of the Min-
istry of Justice and experts in Hebrew and in
jurisprudence. In no sense, of course, are laws
for Israel being drafted at the Harvard Law
School-Israel Cooperative Research project cen-
ter. What is being done is the collection and or-
ganization of the infinite variety of information
necessary to enable the Knesseth, Israel's legis-
lative body, to draft the new code in the light of
complete knowledge.
This approach to this problem, which has such
huge importance, is of particular significance in
this day and age. How good it is to see scholarly
98
cooperation across continents in creating means
to enable men and women to live in peace and
confidence !
I have no doubt that from this present effort
new concepts may arise. They will take their
place along with the many gifts which the legal
minds of Israel have bestowed upon the philoso-
phy of the law. I believe that, when the work at
Harvard is utilized by the Knesseth, it will carry
with it the conviction that ultimate good and jus-
tice can be achieved through peaceful cooperation
with neighboring nations.
Israel in the Community of Nations
I am interested not only in the development of
the law of Israel, but as a member of the Cabinet
I have watched with admiration Israel's growth
among the community of nations in almost every
area of human endeavor — in science, industry, lit-
erature, and other areas of mankind's never-
ending struggle for progress. There is already
a great deal of traffic over the American-Israel
"friendship bridge." As time goes on, I am con-
vinced, this will increasingly become a two-way
movement, for we will surely have much to learn
from a people that has produced the ethical values
that are held in common by all Americans, par-
ticularly after this people has resumed its normal
existence in its ancestral homeland. This close
collaboration extends to the most important areas
of scientific research. All of us were gratified
to hear of the atomic energy agreement recently
concluded between the United States and Israel. 2
The promise of nuclear energy means much to
Israel, where natural resources are sparse. The
prospect of Israel's scientific genius being brought
to bear on the peaceful use of atomic energy
means much to the United States and to free peo-
ples everywhere. In dealing with the question of
this two-way bridge between the United States
and Israel, I wish to express my hearty congratu-
lations to the Zionist Organization of America,
whose current work in this field is no less im-
portant than the historic role it played in the
creation of the State of Israel.
Now, I am persuaded that, in our relations with
Israel, any differences which may arise from time
to time will undoubtedly be resolved to the mutual
- Bulletin of June 20, 1955, p. 1018, footnote 1.
Department of Sfafe Bulletin
satisfaction of both countries. Occasional dif-
ferences are bound to arise between the friendliest
of nations, and the Government of the United
States has encountered this even in its dealings
with its closest allies. But where there are strong
ties of mutual interest, identity of outlook, and
common aspirations, the disagreements are bound
to be temporary. The geographic distance be-
tween the Potomac and the Jordan Rivers may be
great, but there is certainly little difference in
spirit between the two countries. I, therefore,
firmly believe that our initial premise is that
Israel's destiny will remain linked with that of
the United States of America.
we shall be doing much to bring peace to the area.
With respect to our planning for regional defense,
I should like to say this :
The United States Government, I assure you, is
not unmindful of Israel's security and the pro-
tection and welfare of its people. It is our hope
and our desire that area defense arrangements will
develop through which all countries in the area
can contribute toward their mutual protection
against aggression from the Communist menace.
This is definitely in our own interest and repre-
sents a major element in our policy for the Middle
East and for strengthening the defense of the free
world.
Arab-Israel Conflict
I know that the continuing tension between
Israel and her neighbors figures prominently in
your deliberations at this convention. The absence
of peace between Israel and the Arab States cer-
tainly provides ample reason for concern. The
Government of the United States is not only mind-
ful of the urgency of the problem but is actively
seeking to bring about a solution. This was re-
cently clearly expressed by President Eisenhower.
In his message requesting congressional approval
for the new Mutual Security Program, 3 the Presi-
dent stated :
The continuing tension between the Arab States and
Israel handicaps the peoples of all Near East nations.
We should continue to work with the governments and
peoples of both sides to improve their economic status and
accelerate their progress toward lasting peace between
them. Our cooperation is beginning to bring results, par-
ticularly in the development of water resources. Such
developments in the Palestine area can go far to remove
present causes of tension.
This Government is determined to move for-
ward in the spirit reflected in the President's mes-
sage, and we shall persist in our efforts until we
have achieved the peace which is required in the
region by all those who seek to achieve a free
world, and without which neither Israel nor the
Arab States will be able to prosper. The issues
of the Arab-Israel conflict can be resolved through
patience and understanding. It is the task of
everyone to recognize this and to work toward it.
By continuing our economic and technical as-
sistance to both Israel and the Arab States and
by raising living standards throughout the region,
3 Ibid., May 2, 1955, p. 712.
July 18, 7955
Refugee Ships Begin
Series of Trips
The Department of State announced on June 24
(press release 384) a series of trips by refugee
ships to meet the need for supplementary ocean
transportation created by the steadily increasing
volume of visa issuance under the Refugee Relief
Act. A series of 10 trips is planned before the end
of 1955.
The first of these ships is scheduled to arrive in
New York harbor July 12 and is expected to have
aboard the 30,000th person to arrive in the United
States with a visa issued under the Refugee Act.
The vessel is a Navy transport, General W. C.
Langfttt. It is now en route to Bremerhaven, Ger-
many, after being refitted in this country for refu-
gee service. It is expected to leave Bremerhaven
July 2, with 1,215 refugees from Germany and
Austria. The General Langfttt is under charter
to the Intergovernmental Committee for European
Migration (Icem), which has responsibility for
transportation of migrants who require ocean-
crossing assistance.
Plans for a ceremony marking the departure
of the refugee ship from Bremerhaven are being
made. In New York the newcomers will be
greeted by officials and representatives of the re-
ligious, fraternal, and nationality organizations
that endorse individual sponsorships of the refu-
gees and help sponsors in the details of the cases.
The voluntary agency representatives will be at
the dock to help the refugees reach the inland
transportation that will take them to their new
homes and jobs. The agency groups which have
99
endorsed assurances for refugees on the General
Lang-fltt are Church World Service, International
Rescue Committee, International Social Service,
National Catholic Welfare Conference, National
Lutheran Council, Tolstoy Foundation, United
HIAS Service, and United Ukrainian American
Relief Committee. Icem has arranged with the
Council on Student Travel to provide shipboard
orientation and language training for the refugee
passengers.
So far the more than 25,000 persons who have
entered the United States under the Refugee Act
have come in by plane or as passengers on reg-
ularly scheduled ocean vessels. With issuance of
Refugee Act visas having topped the 35,000 mark,
10,000 persons are now having arrangements made
for their transportation to this country. Icem
plans the addition of a second vessel to its charter
arrangements, to bring about a total of 10 cross-
ings to the United States before the end of the
year. These will convey approximately 12,000
persons, in addition to others who will continue
to come by air or other surface transportation.
As of June 17, 35,096 Refugee Act visas have
been issued and 131,529 persons are listed in the
so-called pipeline — the cumulative total of all who
have been asked to submit documents for the proc-
essing of their cases. The weekly gain in visa
issuance is running above 1,000 and the weekly
gain in the pipeline total is above 2,000. Since
the first of this year the visa issuance gain has
been 50.4 percent, and the pipeline gain 51.18
percent.
The Refugee Act, which extends through 1956,
provides for issuance overseas of 209,000 visas. 1
Special Aid to Greece To Repair
Earthquake Damage
Press release 385 dated June 24
The Department of State, in conjunction with
the Department of Agriculture and the Foreign
Operations Administration, announces new spe-
cial aid for Greece in an amount totaling $19.2
million.
This assistance expresses the sympathy of the
United States to the Government of Greece and
to the Greek people for the suffering and devasta-
tion caused by recent earthquake disasters. This
new aid will help Greece to meet the heavy eco-
nomic pressures resulting from the earthquake
destruction.
The special aid will be made up as follows :
A grant of $7.5 million in defense-support
funds will be made available to Greece under the
current Mutual Security Program. The bulk of
this assistance will be applied directly to the re-
construction of earthquake-stricken areas and will
take the form of construction materials.
Programs for the sale of U.S. agricultural com-
modities under title I of the Agricultural Trade
Development and Assistance Act (P. L. 480, 83d
Congress) have also been agreed to. In recogni-
tion of the special situation in Greece, authoriza-
tion has been made that the drachma equivalent of
$7.5 million accruing from these sales will be
made available to the Greek Government on a
grant basis. Also, $4.2 million in drachma real-
ized from these sales will be loaned to the Greek
Government as further economic assistance.
The agreements concerning the aid to be pro-
vided under P. L. 480 were signed at Athens on
June 24, 1955.
Shooting Down of U.S. Plane
by Soviet Aircraft
Following is the text of a note delivered to the
Soviet Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Jidy 7 re-
garding the shooting down of a U.S. naval plane
oy Soviet jet-propelled aircraft over the Bering
Sea on June 23, together with a translation of a
Soviet memorandum transmitted oy Soviet For-
eign Minister Molotov to Secretary Dulles at San
Francisco on June 25. 1
U.S. NOTE OF JULY 7
Press release 421 dated July 7
The United States Government acknowledges
receipt of the memorandum of the Soviet Govern-
ment transmitted by the Soviet Foreign Minister,
Mr. Molotov, to the Secretary of State, Mr. Dulles,
1 For a message of the President to the Congress, trans-
mitted May 27, with recommendations for amending the
Refugee Relief Act, see Bulletin of June 13, 1955, p. 951.
1 For remarks by Secretary Dulles at a news conference
on June 28, see Bulletin of July 11, 1955, pp. 50 and 52.
100
Department of State Bulletin
on June 25, regarding the shooting down of a
United States naval aircraft by Soviet military
jet-propelled aircraft on June 23.
The facts in possession of the United States
Government do not accord with the statements set
forth in the Soviet memorandum under acknowl-
edgment. The United States plane, of propeller
type, was on a routine daylight shipping surveil-
lance flight, of a regular and well-known char-
acter. Such flights have been made at more or
less regular intervals for some time past. The
plane was on its regular route, which involved, at
one point, flying over international waters in the
channel between the United States (St. Lawrence
Island) and the Soviet Union.
Carefully verified information discloses : that
the United States plane was at no time nearer the
Soviet Union than the approximate middle of
the above-mentioned channel and was always well
over international waters; that it did not at any
time fire on the attacking Soviet aircraft ; that no
warning of any sort was given by the Soviet
fighters before they opened fire on the United
States plane.
The United States Government notes the state-
ment of the Soviet Government that clue to
weather conditions, the possibility of error on the
part of the Soviet planes existed in regard to this
incident. It is presumed that this possibility of
error refers to the geographic position and not the
identity of the United States aircraft since it was
flying in a clear area above broken lower cloud
strata at the time it was attacked.
Taking into account the regret expressed by the
Soviet Government; its offer of compensation for
damages to the plane and crew by the payment of
50 percent thereof; and, in particular, the state-
ment in the Soviet memorandum that strict orders
have been issued by the Soviet Government to its
military authorities to refrain from any future
action of this character, the Government of the
United States is prepared, for the reasons herein
mentioned, to regard the Soviet memorandum as
providing an acceptable basis for the disposal of
this particular incident ; noting at the same time,
however, that the United States plane acted
throughout in a correct and blameless manner in
pursuance of its peaceful mission and was in fact
attacked over international waters.
In conclusion, the United States Government
expresses the hope that the Soviet Government
will indeed in the future take all necessary meas-
ures to avoid repetition of this and like incidents,
a repetition which, if it occurred, would inevitably
have a harmful effect upon the relations of our two
nations, relations which the United States, for its
part, desires to see improved.
SOVIET MEMORANDUM OF JUNE 25
[Translation]
According to a communication from competent Soviet
agencies, on June 23 of this year at 12:57 a.m., Moscow
time (7: 57 a.m., Khabarovsk time), a military plane of the
"Neptune" type, with identification marks of the Air Force
of the U.S.A., violated the state border of the Soviet Union
in the Bering Strait area east of Cape Chaplin (Chukotka) .
At the approach of the Soviet fighters that flew toward
it for the purpose of indicating that it was within the
boundaries of the U. S. S. R. and of proposing that it quit
the air space of the Soviet Union immediately, an exchange
of shots occurred between the American and the Soviet
planes.
The Soviet Government has already called the attention
of the Government of the U.S.A. to the necessity for the
adoption of measures by the American military command
which will prevent the possibility of repetition of the
undesirable incidents which have taken place in the past
in connection with repeated violations of the state borders
of the U. S. S. R. by American military planes. This new
violation of the Soviet state border by an American plane
is proof that the American authorities have not taken the
necessary steps that would prevent similar undesirable
incidents.
In a conversation with me on June 24, you stated, Mr.
Dulles, that the American plane did not violate Soviet
territorial waters, although you did admit that with the
present speeds of planes some deviation of a plane might
occur. Having investigated the circumstances of this
incident, the competent Soviet agencies maintain that it
occurred above territorial waters of the Soviet Union. The
conclusions of the Soviet side do not confirm the statement
that the incident was provoked by the actions of the Soviet
planes. At the same time the said Soviet agencies re-
ported that the planes met above dense clouds, with the
absence of visual orientation. Under such conditions the
possibility cannot be excluded that the incident was the
result of an inaccurate determination of the location of the
planes at the moment when they came together. Nor can
the possibility be excluded that the violation of the air
space of the Soviet Union by the American plane was the
result of the actions of certain representatives of the
American command who evidently are not interested in the
prevention of such incidents. Whichever of these two cir-
cumstances may have been the cause of the incident, the
Soviet command has strict orders, in maintaining the de-
fense of the Soviet border, to avoid at the same time any
actions outside the limits of the Soviet state border. Such
orders have been given, in particular, in connection with
the said incident with the American plane which took place
on June 23 of this year. The Soviet Government expects
July 18, J 955
101
the Government of the United States to give strict orders
to its military command not to permit American military
planes to violate the Soviet state border.
The Soviet Government expresses regrets in connection
with the incident which has occurred.
Considering that the incident with the American mili-
tary plane took place under conditions which do not ex-
clude the possibility of error on one side or the other, the
Soviet Government expresses readiness to compensate for
50% of the damage inflicted on the American side, consid-
ering that the other 50% of the damage is to be borne by
the American side.
Protest Against Expulsion of
American Priest From Moscow
Press release 392 dated June 28
Following is the text of a note delivered on June
27 by the American Embassy at Moscow to the
Soviet Ministry of Foreign Affairs concerning the
expulsion from the U.S.S.E. of the Reverend
Georges Bissonnette, a member of the Assumption-
ist Order, in March 1955}
U. S. NOTE OF JUNE 27
The Embassy of the United States of America
presents its compliments to the Ministry of For-
eign Affairs of the Union of Soviet Socialist Re-
publics and has the honor to refer to the Minis-
try's note No. 20/OSA of March 8, 1955 in connec-
tion with the expulsion from the Soviet Union of
Father Bissonnette, an American priest residing
in Moscow under the terms of the exchange of
notes of November 16, 1933 between President
Roosevelt and Mr. Litvinov relating to freedom
of religion for American nationals residing in the
Soviet Union. 1 The Ministry's note under refer-
ence, which makes clear that the action taken
against Father Bissonnette was in retaliation for
the refusal of the United States Government to
extend the visa issued to Archbishop Boris of the
Eussian Orthodox Church, contends that in the
agreement of November 16, 1933 both countries
bound themselves to "extend on the territory of
their countries to citizens of the other party the
right to satisfaction of their spiritual needs by
priests, pastors, rabbis, or other ecclesiastical func-
tionaries who are citizens of the other party".
1 Bulletin of Mar. 14, 1955, p. 424.
102
It will be recalled that the exchange of notes
in 1933 was initiated by a note from President
Roosevelt, the final paragraph of which reads as
follows :
We will expect that religious groups or congregations
composed of nationals of the United States of America
in the territory of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
will be given the right to have their spiritual needs min-
istered to by clergymen, priests, rabbis or other ecclesiasti-
cal functionaries who are nationals of the United States
of America, and that such clergymen, priests, rabbis or
other ecclesiastical functionaries will be protected from
all disability or persecution and will not be denied entry
into the territory of the Soviet Union because of their
ecclesiastical status.
This is the only paragraph of the note which deals
with the question of the right of clergymen to
enter the Soviet Union to minister to the religious
needs of American nationals. The final paragraph
of the Soviet reply of the same date reads as
follows :
Finally, I have the honor to inform you that the Gov-
ernment of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, while
reserving to itself the right of refusing visas to Americans
desiring to enter the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
on personal grounds, does not intend to base such refusals
on the fact of such persons having an ecclesiastical status.
It is apparent that, when considered together,
these two notes can only mean that American
clergymen will be permitted to enter the Soviet
Union to minister to the needs of American na-
tionals resident there, although it is recognized
that the Soviet Government reserved the right to
refuse a visa on "personal grounds". The mean-
ing of this reservation would appear to be that a
visa would be refused if an individual applicant
were objectionable on some ground other than his
being a clergyman.
The reservation made by the Soviet Union is
not applicable in the present instance, since
Father Bissonnette was not expelled because of
objection to him personally but simply in retalia-
tion for action taken by the United States Govern-
ment in connection with Archbishop Boris.
There is no condition of reciprocity contained
in the Soviet note of November 16, 1933, and the
proposal in the United States note of that date
was confined to rights for American clergymen.
That no reciprocity was provided for in these par-
ticular notes appears to have arisen from the fact
that the Soviet Government gave no indication at
that time of being concerned with the problem of
Department of State Bulletin
sending Soviet clergymen abroad. Furthermore,
the fact that the notes contained no provision for
reciprocity cannot be regarded as accidental, since
another exchange of notes between President
Roosevelt and Mr. Litvinov on the same date re-
lating to noninterference in political matters con-
tains a provision for reciprocal adherence to the
engagements undertaken.
It is therefore the view of the United States
Government that there is no basis for the claim
of the Soviet Government that the United States
is bound by the terms of the November 16, 1933
agreement to admit clergymen from the Soviet
Union to minister to the religious needs of Soviet
nationals in the United States.
On the other hand, the United States Govern-
ment regards the action of the Soviet Government
in expelling Father Bissonnette as a violation of
the terms of the 1933 agreement. This violation
is all the more clear in that the expulsion of
Father Bissonnette from the Soviet Union was
undertaken, not because of objection to Father
Bissonnette on personal grounds, but solely in
retaliation for the refusal of the United States
Government to permit the extension of stay in the
United States of the Soviet Archbishop Boris,
whose status in the United States was not com-
parable to that of Father Bissonnette in the Soviet
Union. Archbishop Boris was admitted into the
United States on a temporary visa to deal with
matters pertaining to that faction of the Russian
Orthodox Church in the United States which is
administratively subordinate to the Moscow
Patriarchate. In this capacity, Archbishop Boris
was in contact with American citizens who are
members of the Russian Orthodox Church and
had the possibility of holding religious services
in many different churches in a number of Ameri-
can cities which he visited during his stay in the
United States. In contrast to Archbishop Boris'
status, Father Bissonnette resided in Moscow un-
der the terms of a formal agreement between the
United States and the Soviet Union. He served
the spiritual needs of Americans in Moscow and
had no contact with Soviet citizens of the Roman
Catholic faith. Due to action of the Soviet Gov-
ernment, Father Bissonnette was unable to hold
services in the Roman Catholic church in Moscow
and was forced to use his small apartment for this
purpose.
The United States Government considers as ir-
relevant to the matter at issue the question raised
in the Ministry's note of March 8, 1955 with re-
spect to the practice of the Moscow Patriarchate
in designating heads of the Russian Orthodox
Church in America. It may be noted, however,
that no interference by the United States Govern-
ment has ever been interposed to the appointment
by the Moscow Patriarchate of officials of that
segment of the Russian Orthodox Church in
America which recognizes the right of the Moscow
Patriarchate to make appointments of this kind.
When such officials are not United States citizens,
the conditions of their entry into the United States
are necessarily determined in the context of per-
tinent United States immigration laws and reg-
ulations. As is evident from the action of the
United States Government in permitting visits
to the United States of Soviet clergymen, includ-
ing most recently the late Archbishop Germogen
and Archbishop Boris, the United States Govern-
ment has not objected in principle to temporary
visits to the United States of Soviet ecclesiastics
for the purpose of conducting legitimate church
a ff airs.
In reiterating its protest against the expulsion
of Father Bissonnette the United States Govern-
ment requests that favorable action be taken with
regard to issuance of a Soviet entry visa to Father
Louis Dion, who has been designated by the As-
sumptionist Order to succeed Father Bissonnette
and who made application for a Soviet visa at the
Soviet Embassy in Washington, D.C. on March
23, 1955.
If the Soviet Government now considers it de-
sirable that Soviet clergymen be admitted to the
United States in order to minister to the religious
needs of Soviet nationals, the United States Gov-
ernment is prepared in the interest of reciprocity
to extend to a Soviet clergyman the same possibili-
ties of entry and religious activity as those ac-
corded to American clergymen in the Soviet
Union under the terms of the November 16, 1933
agreement.
SOVIET NOTE OF MARCH 8
[Unofficial translation]
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Union of Soviet
Socialist Republics presents its compliments to the Em-
bassy of the United States of America and in connection
with the Embassy's note No. 636 of March 2 ! of this
1 Not printed.
July 78, 7955
103
year has the honor to state the following:
On February 24 of this year the State Department of
the United States of America informed the Embassy of
the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics at Washington
by telephone that the State Department considered it
impossible to extend the residence in the United States
of America of the Exarch of the Russian Orthodox Church
in America, Archbishop Boris and his secretary, Shishkin.
In this connection the State Department did not indicate
any reasons for this decision.
This action of the State Department is a direct viola-
tion of the Litvinov-Roosevelt agreement of November 16,
1933.
In the foregoing agreement the United States of Amer-
ica and the Soviet Union mutually bound themselves to
extend on the territory of their countries to citizens of
the other party the right to satisfaction of their spiritual
needs by priests, pastors, rabbis, or other ecclesiastical
functionaries who are citizens of the other party.
The refusal of the State Department to extend the
visas of Archbishop Boris and his secretary is also a
violation of established practice for a period of more than
150 years whereby persons appointed by the Moscow
patriarchy have headed the Russian Orthodox Church in
America.
In connection with the foregoing action of the State
Department of the United States of America in respect
of the Exarch of the Russian Orthodox Church in America
Archbishop Boris and his secretary, Shishkin, the Minis-
ter of Foreign Affairs found impossible the further resi-
dence in the Soviet Union of the American priest
Bissonnette.
Documentation Required for
Unofficial Visitors to U.S.
On July 1 {press release 4-11) the Department
of State released the text of the following note
from Walter N. Walmsley, Jr., U.S. Charge
d? Affaires at Moscow, delivered to the Soviet Min-
istry of Foreign Affairs on June 28.
I have the honor to refer to recent communica-
tions between the United States and Soviet Gov-
ernments relative to the documentation of Soviet
citizens entering the United States in a nonofficial
visitor capacity. 1
It appears that there is some misunderstanding
on the part of the Soviet Government concerning
1 For an announcement of the canceling by a group of
Soviet editors of their plans to visit the United States,
see Bulletin of Apr. 25, 1955, p. 695.
the provisions of United States law with regard
to the issuance of nonofficial visitors' visas. This
misunderstanding may relate in part to the issu-
ance by the American Embassy at Moscow of non-
official visas to the Soviet chess team and the Soviet
ski representatives without requiring fingerprint-
ing and the signature of visa application forms.
This action was taken through administrative in-
advertence on the part of visa-issuing officials.
For the information of the Soviet Government
there are quoted below the pertinent provisions
of the United States Immigration and Nationality
Act (Public Law 414 — 82d Congress, approved
June 26, 1952) which are applicable to all persons
entering the United States as nonofficial temporary
visitors :
Section 221 (6). Each alien who applies for a visa shall
be registered and fingerprinted in connection with his
application, and shall furnish copies of his photograph
signed by him for such use as may be by regulations re-
quired. The requirements of this subsection may be
waived in the discretion of the Secretary of State in the
case of any alien who is within that class of nonimmi-
grants enumerated in sections 101 (a) (15) (A), and
101 (a) (15) (G), or in the case of any alien who is
granted a diplomatic visa on a diplomatic passport or on
the equivalent thereof. . . .
Section 222 (e). Except as may be otherwise prescribed
by regulations, each copy of an application required by
this section shall be signed by the applicant in the pres-
ence of the consular officer, and verified by the oath of the
applicant administered by the consular officer. . . .
There exists no authority whereby requirements
of this statute may be waived.
I should point out that the sections of the Im-
migration and Nationality Act quoted above do
not apply to foreign government officials so ac-
credited by their governments and accepted by the
United States Government in accordance with the
pertinent provisions of this act including officials
so accredited and accepted but who may not be
permanently assigned to the United States, such
as persons or members of groups visiting the
United States who have been accredited by their
respective governments as officials, nor to foreign
officials connected with international organiza-
tions within the meaning of the International
Organizations and Immunities Act.
There is enclosed a copy of the United States
Immigration and Nationality Act.
104
Department of State Bulletin
Restrictions on Photography and
Sketching by Rumanians in U. S.
Press release 334 dated June 9
DEPARTMENT ANNOUNCEMENT
The U.S. Government has instituted regula-
tions governing photography, sketching, and the
execution of plastic works of art by Eumanian offi-
cial personnel and their dependents in the United
States. These regulations are comparable to pres-
ent Rumanian regulations restricting photog-
raphy, filming, and the execution of plastic works
of art by U.S. citizens and other foreign nationals
in Rumania, which presumably have been insti-
tuted for reasons of security.
Inasmuch as these regulations would be cir-
cumvented by the procurement here of certain
photographic or cartographic materials which are
not available in Rumania for procurement by U.S.
citizens, it was deemed necessary specifically to
prohibit the procurement by Rumanian official
personnel and their dependents of materials of
this kind in the United States.
As stated in the U.S. Government's note of June
9, 1955, should the Government of the Rumanian
People's Republic conclude that the international
situation were such that security requirements en-
abled it to reexamine its regulations restricting
photography, filming, and the execution of plastic
works of art by U.S. citizens in Rumania and to
make available to them materials of the types
noted, this Government in turn would be disposed
to reconsider its own security requirements on the
same basis.
U.S. NOTE OF JUNE 9
The Secretary of State presents his compliments
to the Honorable the Minister of the Rumanian
People's Republic 1 and has the honor to state
that the following regulations have been instituted
and will apply until further notice to photog-
raphy, sketching, and the execution of works of
plastic art in the United States by Rumanian offi-
cial personnel and their dependents.
1. Rumanian official personnel and their de-
pendents in the United States may execute works
of plastic art, take photographs, or make sketches
1 Anton Moisescu.
July 18, 7955
351154— B5
of historical and architectural monuments; the
buildings of cultural, educational, and medical
institutions; theaters, museums, city, state or na-
tional parks; stadiums; and urban and rural
scenes in the background of which there are none
of the objects listed below in points 3a through 3g.
2. Within the premises of economic enterprises
and organizations engaged in the manufacture of
civilian goods, as well as in cultural institutions,
Rumanian official personnel and their dependents
in the United States may, in individual cases, exe-
cute works of plastic art, make sketches, or take
photographs provided that they have first obtained
the permission of the administration of these insti-
tutions and organizations.
3. Rumanian official personnel and their de-
pendents in the United States may not execute
works of plastic art, make sketches, or take pho-
tographs of the objects listed below. This pro-
vision is also applicable in cases where the spe-
cified objects are under construction:
a. Areas where Rumanian official personnel
and their dependents do not have free access.
b. Industrial enterprises of any kind.
c. Fuel storage depots.
d. Military objects, installations, technology
and armaments.
e. All water ports; airfields and airports;
hydro-electric, thermo-electric or nuclear power
installations; bridges; railroad junctions and
terminals; tunnels; reservoirs and dams; silos;
and water towers.
f. Scientific research institutions, offices and
laboratories.
g. Radio, television, telephone and telegraph
stations or facilities.
4. Rumanian official personnel and their de-
pendents may not execute works of plastic art,
make sketches, or take photographs from air-
planes on flights over territory of the United
States.
5. Rumanian official personnel and their de-
pendents in the United States may not purchase
or otherwise procure the following items except
where such items appear in or are appendices to
newspapers, periodicals, technical journals, at-
lases and books commercially available to the
general public:
a. Aerial photographs, mosaics and photo-
maps.
105
b. Maps and charts of scale of or larger than
1 : 250,000.
c. Navigational and hydrographic maps and
charts.
d. Panoramic photographs or detailed de-
velopment plans of industrial cities.
The foregoing regulations are comparable to
present Rumanian regulations restricting the exe-
cution of plastic works of art, photography and
filming, by United States citizens in Rumania
which presumably have been instituted for rea-
sons of security. If the Government of the Ru-
manian People's Republic should hereafter con-
clude that the international situation were such
that security requirements enabled it to reex-
amine its regulations restricting the execution of
plastic works of art, photography and filming by
United States citizens in Riunania and to make
available to them materials of the types noted
above, the Government of the United States would,
in turn, be disposed to reconsider its own security
requirements on the same basis.
artistic interest, as well as views of the city and land-
scapes, which do not include items specified helow, which
are prohibited.
2. It is prohibited to photograph, film, and execute
works of plastic art:
(a) in areas where foreign citizens and members
of diplomatic missions do not have free access;
(b) from planes during flights;
(c) of objects connected with: industrial enterprises
of any kind, military armament, military constructions
and establishments; railway junctions, marshaling
yards of the C. F. R. (Rumanian State Railways),
tunnels, railway and highway bridges ; airfields and
airports, river and seaports, radio transmitting and
telecommunications stations, electric power stations,
including reservoirs, dams, etc. ; fuel depots, silos, and
water towers.
This provision applies also in cases where the above-
mentioned items are under construction.
3. Taking photographs, filming, or executing works of
plastic art within the premises of economic enterprises
and organizations working for civilian production, as
well as in cultural institutions, is permitted with the
prior approval of the head of the respective enterprise,
organization or institution.
RUMANIAN RESTRICTIONS APPLICABLE TO
PHOTOGRAPHY, FILMING, AND EXECUTION
OF PLASTIC WORKS OF ART BY U.S. CITIZENS
IN RUMANIA
The Rumanian regulations which restrict
photography, filming, and the execution of works
of plastic art by U.S. citizens and other foreign
nationals in Rumania are contained in the Ru-
manian Ministry for Foreign Affairs note No.
62217 of October 13, 1954, the text of which fol-
lows:
The Ministry for Foreign Affairs of the Rumanian
People's Republic presents its compliments to the Lega-
tion of the United States of America and has the honor
to inform the Legation herewith on the legal provisions
concerning the conditions under which filming, photo-
graphing and execution of works of plastic art may be
carried out on the territory of the Rumanian People's
Republic.
Foreign citizens, including members of diplomatic
missions accredited to the Rumanian People's Republic,
may take films photographs and execute works of plastic
art on the territory of the Rumanian People's Republic
under the following conditions :
1. Foreign citizens, including members of diplomatic
missions accredited to the Rumanian People's Republic
may execute works of plastic art, take photographs and
films on the territory of the Rumanian People's Republic
of buildings, monuments, and objects of cultural and
Importance of International Travel
in Advancing World Peace
by Sinclair Weeks
Secretary of Commerce 1
It is a pleasure and a distinct honor to have the
opportunity to welcome to Washington the Per-
manent Executive Committee of the Inter- Ameri-
can Travel Congresses.
President Eisenhower has said that if there is a
list in this world of enthusiastic boosters for inter-
national travel he would like to be numbered
among those close to the top of the list. Although
I may not be able to match my chief in distances
traveled or countries visited, I certainly claim
equal status in terms of enthusiasm.
To my mind there is no better way to improve
understanding among the countries of this hemi-
sphere than through exchange of tourists. As a
bonus in this activity, we also stimulate the flow
of currency and exchange of goods through the
spending of these tourists.
Since the Department of Commerce is the
agency of our Government responsible for en-
1 Address made before the inaugural meeting of the
Permanent Executive Committee of the Inter-American
Travel Congresses at Washington, D.C., on June 20 (De-
partment of Commerce press release).
106
Department of State Bulletin
couragement of international travel, I thought you
might be interested in a few statistics on tourist
travel and its relation to total foreign trade. This
year U.S. citizens will spend approximately $1.5
billion for foreign travel. More than $1 billion of
this sum represents actual spending by U.S. resi-
dents in foreign countries. The balance goes for
payment of transportation fares to foreign and
U.S. carriers.
It is particularly interesting to note that, while
our imports of merchandise have remained
roughly level when compared to 1951, our foreign
travel has increased so rapidly that it will be equal
in value to almost 12 percent of our imports in
1955 as compared to 7.6 percent in 1951. Thus,
in many parts of the world, tourism is providing
the fastest growing source of dollars, which in
turn provide new funds for local investment in
industries.
Fully as important, our citizens are learning to
understand and appreciate the cultures, traditions,
and problems of other countries. As their inter-
ests broaden, they read more and participate more
in discussions concerning these other countries,
and their desire to travel increases.
Increasing Inter-American Travel
Your primary interest, of course, is in the pro-
motion of travel to and within Latin America.
Frankly, the statistics reveal that many of the
Latin American countries are not getting their
due share of the American tourist dollar. With
our residents spending $1 billion in foreign coun-
tries this year, Mexico will receive about 20 per-
cent and the West Indies and Central America
another 9 percent. But South America will prob-
ably receive only about 2 percent. Here is a meas-
ure of the task confronting your organization, to
increase its share of the growing American travel
market.
Some of your countries are far from the United
States, and the cost of travel for American tourists
is accordingly high. But many of them are close
at hand, and their attractiveness should bring
much larger numbers of visitors from our country.
And in all of them, there is certainly the oppor-
tunity to develop increased volumes of travel
among themselves.
We must recognize that a broad and intelligent
program of travel development is necessary in
each country if it wishes to attract visitors — and
this means such items as the reduction of redtape
formalities, provision of hotel facilities, improve-
ment of centers of tourist interest, adequate ad-
vertising budgets, and the establishment of tour-
ist promotional offices in the main markets. All
of these are matters with which your new Execu-
tive Committee will deal, and I commend to you
their careful study on a country-by-country basis.
As you know, it is the policy of the United
States Government to encourage the development
of international travel for its economic, social, and
cultural benefits. President Eisenhower has twice
stated this policy in messages to the Congress,
and the Commerce Department and other Govern-
ment agencies are actively cooperating in imple-
menting it.
Simplifying Entry Procedures
We well realize that the United States has cer-
tain requirements applicable to tourists which may
sometimes harass the visitor, but these are being
carefully studied to determine all possible ways
of simplifying nonimmigrant entry procedures.
In any case, this factor does not affect the basic
objective which is symbolized here today — that of
encouraging U.S. residents to visit foreign coun-
tries and to assist you in attracting them.
The problem has been recognized at high levels,
and the means are at hand to solve it. A note-
worthy fact is the encouraging action taken by the
1954 Meeting of Ministers of Finance or Economy
at Kio de Janeiro in unanimously adopting a res-
olution which recommends to all of the American
Republics prompt and constructive action upon
various specific problems in the field of travel
development.
In addition, the Economic and Social Council
of the United Nations this year formally rec-
ognized the importance of international travel and
requested member governments to encourage its
growth in numerous ways. 2 And, of course, the
periodic Inter- American Travel Congresses have
agreed to many useful conclusions and recommen-
dations.
The task now is to put these recommendations
into actual effect among countries with which we
! For a statement on "Increasing International Travel"
by U.S. Representative Preston Hotchkis in the Economic
and Social Council on Mar. 31, see Bulletin of May 2,
1955, p. 741.
July 18, 1955
107
have special ties of friendship and economic in-
terest here in the Western Hemisphere; and this
task, I am glad to say, is in the hands of your able
committee.
I congratulate you upon this auspicious inau-
guration of your important work and express to
you the best wishes of the United States Govern-
ment for the success of your endeavors, which are
so important in advancing world peace.
Changes in Regulations on
Issuance of Nonimmigrant Visas
Press release 410 dated July 1
Seeking to facilitate international travel, in ac-
cord with the emphasis the President has given
the subject in a message to the Congress, 1 the De-
partment of State on July 1 announced changes
in regulations concerning the issuance of non-
immigrant visas.
The changes were issued after consultation with
other agencies of Government and Members of
the Congress. In making these changes, the De-
partment has adhered to the principles established
by Congress that a differentiation must be made
between an immigrant and nonimmigrant and that
the "double check" system provided by law be
maintained. This system provides that an immi-
gration officer checks the alien on his arrival to
make certain there has been no change in his status
between the date the visa was issued and the time
of his arrival in the United States.
All U.S. Embassies have been instructed to
negotiate with the governments to which they are
accredited to work out broad agreements which
will facilitate travel on a reciprocal basis and
thereby assure to Americans the rights and priv-
ileges which the United States is offering to for-
eigners.
Among the changes are the following :
1. A nonimmigrant visa may be valid for any
number of visits within a period of 4 years and
with no fee. Two years was the previous maxi-
mum validity. (A United States passport has a
maximum validity of 4 years.) 2
2. A nonimmigrant visa may be revalidated up
1 Bulletin of Jan. 24, 1955, p. 121.
2 The changes in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 6, and 7 are immedi-
ately effective in all countries where visas are not required.
to 4 years without a formal application. The pre-
vious period was 2 years. 2
3. A nonimmigrant visa may be revalidated
within a year, rather than 3 months as previously
required. This is to facilitate the travel of those
who reside long distances from the United States
and could hardly be expected to pay another visit
to the United States within a short period of time. 2
4. Consular officers have been instructed that
they may issue a nonimmigrant visa valid for two
entries in cases where this may be required when
an alien wishes to visit the United States, proceed
to a third country, and then return to the United
States on his way home. Heretofore, in some in-
stances an alien has been required to wait some
time in the third country before he could get the
visa to return to his home through the United
States. The new provision for a round-trip visa
will facilitate the travel of these people.
5. Where foreign countries require single-entry
visas on a reciprocal basis, the Department pro-
poses a joint agreement to allow a citizen of either
country to buy at any one time as many such visas,
or entries, as he may desire. Now he must go to
the issuing office every time he wants to make a
trip.
6. Heretofore, one type of visa has been required
for a businessman and another type for a tourist
for pleasure. The Department, after consultation
with the Immigration and Naturalization Serv-
ice, has instructed consuls to issue visas valid both
for business and for pleasure where no fees are
required, or where the fees for the two different
types of visas are the same. If any other country
charges different fees for these two types of visas,
American consular officers may now issue a visa
valid both for business or for pleasure, if the alien
desires to pay the higher fee. 2
7. The Department has also provided that aliens
may have their names registered and maintained
on quota waiting lists and still be issued nonimmi-
grant visas for bona fide visits, with the proviso
that any violation of nonimmigrant status will
result in the removal of the name from the quota
waiting list. Further, the name may not be re-
instated as of the date of original priority. 2
8. In cooperation with other agencies of Gov-
ernment, the Department is adopting a new and
simplified application form for a nonimmigrant
visa. Questionnaire forms and preliminary ap-
plication blanks which have been used in the past
and which have slowed up the issuance of nonim-
108
Department of State Bulletin
migrant visas will now be used only when it is
necessary to mail them to persons living some
distance from the consulate.
9. A bill endorsed by the Department is pending
in Congress which would eliminate the issuance of
fee stamps, and the Department has under con-
sideration a simplified system for recording fees
in an effort to speed up the process of issuing a
visa.
During fiscal year 1954, American consulates
issued 400,000 nonimmigrant visas, many of them
valid for more than one entry, and 60 million
visits were paid to the United States. This vast
traffic has created many serious problems which
the new regulations are designed to eliminate.
The Department pointed out that any country
handling this number of visitors must maintain
orderly controls. In addition to the nonimmigrant
visas issued, roughly a quarter of a million immi-
grants enter the United States each year. It is
not only required by law, but it is necessary, in
order to maintain economic equilibrium, to make
a distinction between an immigrant and a non-
immigrant.
These new regulations take this fully into ac-
count but provide that upon the establishment of
nonimmigrant status a visa shall consist of nothing
more than a rubber stamp in a passport to identify
the traveler and to establish his nonimmigrant
status, and it may remain in effect for a long period
of time unless there is a change in the status. The
effort is directed toward making the issuance of a
visa an extremely simple process, and, once it is in
the passport, no further visits to an American
consulate need to be made during the life of the
visa unless the visitor changes his status.
U.S. Delegations to
International Conferences
20th Session, ECOSOC
The Department of State announced on June 30
(press release 404) that John C. Baker, U.S. Rep-
resentative on the U.N. Economic and Social
Council, will head the U.S. delegation to the 20th
session of the Council convening at Geneva on
July 5.
The other members of the U.S. delegation will
be as follows :
Deputy U.S. Representatives
Walter M. Kotschnig, Director of the Office of Interna-
tional Economic and Social Affairs, Department of
State
Nat B. King, U.S. Mission to United Nations, New York,
N.T.
Public Adviser
Ellsworth Brewer Buck, chairman of the board of the L. A.
Dreyfus Company, Staten Island, N.Y.
Advisers
Clarence Blau, Assistant to the Director, Bureau of For-
eign Commerce, Department of Commerce
Kathleen Bell, OtHce of International Economic and Social
Affairs, Department of State
Philip Burnett, OtEce of International Economic and Social
Affairs, Department of State
Kathryn G. Heath, Senior Staff Officer, Office of the Secre-
tary, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare
Joseph C. Hickingbotham, Jr., Special Assistant to the
Assistant Secretary for Economic Affairs, Department
of State
Otis E. Mulliken, Office of International Economic and
Social Affairs, Department of State
Fred Ritchie, Office of Research Statistics and Reports,
Foreign Operations Administration
William J. Stibravy, Office of International Financial and
Development Affairs, Department of State
George Tobias, Labor Attache, U.S. Resident Delegation
for International Organizations, Geneva, Switzerland
Frederick D. Vreeland, U.S. Resident Delegation for Inter-
national Organizations, Geneva, Switzerland
William H. Wynne, Office of International Finance, De-
partment of the Treasury
Reports Officer
Willard Elsbree
The provisional agenda for the 20th session in-
cludes major reviews of the world economic and
social situation; general review of the develop-
ment and coordination of the economic, social, and
human-rights programs and activities of the
United Nations and the specialized agencies as a
whole; international commodity problems; fi-
nancing of economic development ; and reports of
various commissions and nongovernmental organ-
izations. One of the primary tasks of the Council
will be to review the activities of the United
Nations programs of technical assistance, includ-
ing the program for the coming year.
U.S. Representative on ECOSOC
Confirmed by Senate
The Senate on June 29 confirmed John C. Baker
to be U.S. Representative on the United Nations
Economic and Social Council.
July 78, 7955
109
The Foreign Trade Policy of the United States
by Ben H. Thibodeaux
Director, Office of International Trade and Resources 1
In this group and in the kind of city that Pitts-
burgh is, there is no need for me to attempt an
inspirational talk on the importance of inter-
national trade. It may suffice to recall the large
part that exports play in the earnings of three of
the industries which have helped make Pittsburgh
great: steel, electrical equipment, and coal. These
three industries alone exported products to the
tune of $1.4 billion in 1954. And, of course, there
are other important American export products,
such as automobiles and farm machinery, which
are derived in part from steel and other materials
produced in Pittsburgh. The steel industry, in
turn, is dependent upon imports of various alloy-
ing elements and, increasingly, of iron ore. To
you, as businessmen and civic leaders of Pitts-
burgh, these illustrative facts are known. You
are aware also of the importance of international
trade, both exports and imports, to the economy
of the United States.
People generally in the United States are be-
coming increasingly foreign-trade conscious. This
is shown in a very interesting study being made by
the League of Women Voters. In all parts of the
country, the League members are conducting sur-
veys to determine the importance of foreign trade
in our local communities. The results are ex-
tremely illuminating. In general they show that
both exports and imports come right down to in-
dividual businesses and to the daily lives of people.
Often it is found that individual businessmen en-
gage in foreign trade in ways that are obscure to
them. An extreme illustration of this is the
bottler of a famous soft drink who reportedly re-
1 Address made before the World Trade Council of the
Pittsburgh Chamber of Commerce, Pittsburgh, Ta., on
June 30.
marked, "I'm not interested in foreign trade; I'm
too busy shipping stuff to Cuba." I do not believe,
however, that the case is typical.
So much for the general aspects of our foreign
trade. What I should like to discuss with you,
rather, is the subject of what the United States can
do both to facilitate trade and to reduce the ten-
sions which can arise, from economic conflicts
among nations. And make no mistake about it.
The actions of the United States will determine
to a large extent the kind of trade world in which
we will live. This follows from our position of
predominant economic strength and from the fact
that we are now the largest importer and exporter
in the world. We can exercise our economic
leadership toward continued cooperation in the
reduction of trade barriers and the expansion of
trade among the free countries of the world. Or,
if we do not, we face the risk of a return to the
protectionism and trade restrictions of the period
between the two world wars.
Distinction Between GATT and OTC
The instruments for international trade coop-
eration are at hand. I should like to discuss them
with you. One is the General Agreement on Tar-
iffs and Trade, perhaps better known as the Gatt;
the other is the proposed Organization for Trade
Cooperation, now referred to by its initials, Otc.
I should like to make clear the distinction be-
tween the Gatt and the Otc. Very simply put,
it is this :
The Gatt is a trade agreement. It came into
existence at the beginning of 194S. The United
States has participated in the Gatt ever since that
time under the authorization vested in the Presi-
dent by the Trade Agreements Act ; and therefore,
110
Department of State Bulletin
of course, the Gatt is not being submitted for
congressional approval.
The Organization for Trade Cooperation, on the
other hand, would supply the much needed organ-
izational machinery whose chief function would be
to administer the Gatt. The proposed Ore would
also serve as a forum for trade consultations and
negotiations, and it would collect and publish in-
formation on trade matters and commercial policy.
The Otc would be a formal international organi-
zation, and United States membership in it is con-
ditioned upon congressional approval. This ap-
proval was requested by President Eisenhower on
April 14. 2 A bill, H. R. 5550, has been introduced
for that purpose.
Accomplishments of GATT
Since a major function of the Otc would be to
administer the Gatt, let us first look at the Gatt.
What is it and how have we benefited from our
participation in it?
The Gatt, as I have said, is a trade agreement.
It is a multilateral agreement. That is, instead of
only two countries as in a bilateral agreement, the
Gatt has 34 participants and Japan is soon to be
added as a 35th. 3 These countries account for
about 80 percent of total world trade.
The purpose of the Gatt is to reduce tariffs and
other barriers to trade and to insure fair play in
international commerce. The agreement consists
of two substantive parts: (1) tariff schedules, ne-
gotiated multilaterally and applying to all the
member countries; and (2) a set of rules of good
behavior in international trade.
What has been accomplished under the Gatt?
On the tariff side, the Gatt countries have re-
duced rates or have agreed not to raise existing
rates on some 60,000 items since 1947. We have
obtained tariff concessions covering approximately
50 percent in value of our exports. These conces-
sions have benefited every sector of our economy.
I mentioned a moment ago the importance of
steel-mill products to this area. Many blast-fur-
nace and steel-mill products have benefited from
concessions made by Gatt members, including
Canada, the United Kingdom, South Africa, Cuba,
and Sweden. Through the Gatt, electrical indus-
trial equipment has been granted better tariff treat-
' Bulletin of Apr. 25, 1955, p. 67S
' Ibid., June 27, 1955, p. 1051.
ment in such important markets as France, Bel-
gium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and others.
The trade rules, the other major part of the
Gatt, are to reduce trade barriers other than tar-
iffs. We have found from experience that there
is little use in having trade agreements that deal
with tariff rates only. For example, another coun-
try might give us a tariff reduction and then cancel
it with an internal tax on the imported product.
Or, it might simply restrict or prohibit the im-
portation of the product. The trade rules in the
Gatt are designed to protect the tariff concessions
against such practices and to facilitate trade
generally.
My appreciation of the Gatt trade rules stems
from personal experience. In the years imme-
diately following World War II, I was stationed
in Europe. Much of my time there was spent in
assisting American businessmen to transact trade,
despite a maze of governmental restrictions. And
I can assure you, the difficulties were immense.
Foreign exchange was scarce, and international
trade was rigorously controlled by governments.
Many governments were trying to move toward
economic self-sufficiency — or rather, toward un-
economic self-sufficiency. Practically every
known device to restrict imjDorts was called into
play.
It was to help bring about the dismantling of
this maze of restrictions that the United States
and other countries joined in drawing up the
trade rules that are now in the Gatt. I can tes-
tify to the fact that these rules have been effec-
tive. Of special interest to you would be the
recent consultations with representatives of Bel-
gium and Germany under the Gatt rules, in which
I took part at various times. As a result of these
consultations, both countries are loosening re-
strictions on imports of American coal at a time
when that coal sorely needs additional markets.
Many other examples could be cited to show
how Gatt has contributed to the tremendous ex-
pansion in world trade that has occurred in recent
years. With improved economic conditions and
increased dollar earnings abroad, restrictions im-
posed against dollar imports due to lack of for-
eign exchange are being diminished. Without
the Gatt, we can be fairly sure that the vested
interests which inevitably grow up behind such
restrictions would succeed in keeping those re-
strictions long after the justification for them
had disappeared.
July 18, 1955
111
Thanks in large part to the Gatt, the American
businessman is now able to do business abroad
more freely than at any time since the end of the
war. Governmental restrictions and redtape are
being reduced, and private initiative is being given
an opportunity to do business again on the basis of
price and quality competition.
Need for OTC
The Gatt has been in existence for more than 7
years. It has been highly successful in reducing
trade barriers. Why, then, do we need an Otc to
administer the Gatt ? There are two basic reasons.
I will deal first with the most obvious one.
The Gatt has been applied on a provisional
basis. Its administration has been makeshift.
Despite this handicap, the Gatt has proved its
value. But because of the increasing volume of
work and the need to deal quickly with urgent
trade problems, it has become clear that an effec-
tive and continuing organization must be estab-
lished. To fill this need, the Gatt countries nego-
tiated the Otc agreement. 4
This brings us to the second reason why United
States participation in the Otc will make the Gatt
a more effective instrument of United States
policy. It is a less tangible reason, but it may be
as important as the improvement of the mechanics
of administration.
Approval of this organization by the United
States Congress and by the other governments con-
cerned will constitute an endorsement of the prin-
ciple of international cooperation in trade, and
as such will strengthen the Gatt. It will thus also
strengthen the economic base upon which the col-
lective security of the free world is so largely
dependent.
Structure of OTC
Let me describe briefly the proposed Otc.
Its structure is simple. Its members will be
the countries participating in the Gatt. There
will be an Assembly consisting of all the member
countries. An Executive Committee comprising
17 countries will meet between sessions of the
Assembly and will carry on the work of the Otc.
The membership of the Executive Committee will
include the countries of chief economic impor-
tance — a condition which insures that the United
4 For text, see ibid., Apr. 4, 1955, p. 579.
112
States will always be a member. The organiza-
tion will be serviced by a small secretariat.
There are some serious misconceptions regard-
ing the proposed Otc that I should like to correct.
It lias been contended that our membership would
mean a loss of United States sovereignty and that
our tariffs would be governed by an international
organization. These contentions have no basis in
fact. The Otc would have no supranational
powers. It would administer trade rules that
have been voluntarily accepted by the member
countries. It would have no power to impose
obligations on any of its members. The Otc
would have no power to fix or change tariff rates.
Tariff negotiations would be sponsored by the
Otc, but the actual negotiations would be car-
ried on by the individual countries themselves
on their own responsibility. Whenever the
United States or any other member feels that it
cannot live within the rules of the game as spelled
out in the Otc and the Gatt, it would be free to
withdraw.
What, then, are the powers of the proposed
Otc ? Actually, it has no powers of compulsion.
It has only two means of inducing compliance
with the trade rules. Neither infringes in any
way on national sovereignty.
The first means is the moral force of interna-
tional public opinion. Needless to say, no coun-
try lightly violates rules of the game that have
been adopted voluntarily with a number of other
sovereign countries.
The second means of inducing compliance, go-
ing beyond moral suasion, is that, if a member
country has seriously infringed the trade rules,
the Otc may authorize other members to withdraw
trade benefits they were extending to the offend-
ing member.
The Otc would also have the power to waive
obligations under the Gatt, in exceptional circum-
stances. This flexibility in the trade rules to pro-
vide for exceptional circumstances is an essential
element, enabling governments to cooperate effec-
tively in dealing with their various problems.
Expanding Trade for Free-World Strength
To summarize, the constructive achievements
under the Gatt would be furthered by the organ-
izational arrangements provided in the Otc. It
is in our economic and security interests to par-
ticipate in this cooperative effort. Since our for-
Department of State Bulletin
eign trade is now the largest in the world, we have
the most to lose from barriers to it. The Otc
would facilitate the expansion of trade in a
friendly atmosphere. It would thus contribute to
the economic strength and unity of the free world,
and hence to the solidity of our military and po-
litical alliances against the threat of communism.
The United States has high stakes in H. R. 5550
and in the decision by Congress as to United States
membership in the Otc. For, as President Eisen-
hower said in his message of April 14 to the
Congress :
"Failure to assume membership in the Organi-
zation for Trade Cooperation would be inter-
preted throughout the free world as a lack of gen-
uine interest on the part of this country in the
efforts to expand trade. It would constitute a
serious setback to the momentum which has been
generated toward that objective. It would strike
a severe blow at the development of cooperative
arrangements in defense of the free world. It
could lead to the imposition of new trade restric-
tions on the part of other countries, which would
result in a contraction of world trade and con-
stitute a sharp setback to United States exports.
It could result in regional re-alignments of na-
tions. Such developments, needless to say, would
play directly into the hands of the Communists."
Supplementary Trade Agreement
With Switzerland
Press release 403 dated June 29
The President on June 25, 1955, signed a proc-
lamation giving effect to the Supplementary
Trade Agreement between the United States and
Switzerland, which was signed on June 8, 1955. 1
This agreement provides for compensatory tariff
concessions by the United States to Switzerland,
with a view to restoring the balance of the 1936
Trade Agreement with Switzerland that was up-
set by the increases in duties on watches pro-
claimed last summer pursuant to the escape
clause applicable to that agreement. The proc-
lamation provides that the additional concessions
will become effective on July 11, 1955, the date on
which the Supplementary Agreement will enter
into force.
Proclamation 3099 '
1. Whereas, pursuant to the authority vested in the
President by the Constitution and the statutes, including
section 350 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, on
January 9, 1936, he entered into a trade agreement with
the Swiss Federal Council, including two schedules and
a declaration annexed thereto (49 Stat. (pt. 2) 3918), and
by a proclamation of January 9, 1936 (49 Stat. (pt. 2)
3917), he proclaimed the said trade agreement, which
proclamation has been supplemented by a proclamation
of May 7, 1936 (49 Stat. (pt. 2) 3959), and a proclamation
of November 28, 1940 (54 Stat. (pt. 2) 2461) ;
2. Whereas the said trade agreement specified in the
first recital was supplemented on October 13, 1950, by
certain provisions set forth in the 13th recital of the
President's proclamation of November 26, 1951 (Procla-
mation No. 2954, 66 Stat. C6) ;
3. Whereas, by Proclamation No. 3062 of July 27, 1954
(3 CFR, 1954 Supp., p. 29), s acting under and by virtue
of the authority vested in the President by section 350 of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and by section 7(c)
of the Trade Agreements Extension Act of 1951, and in
accordance with the said trade agreement specified in
the first recital as supplemented on October 13, 1950, the
President proclaimed modifications of duty concessions
granted by the United States with respect to certain prod-
ucts described in item 367 (a) of Schedule II of the said
trade agreement, effective at the close of business July
27, 1954;
4. Whereas the said trade agreement specified in the
first recital, as supplemented on October 13, 1950, provides
for compensatory modifications thereof, whenever action
is taken pursuant to Paragraph 1 of the supplemental
provisions referred to in the second recital of this procla-
mation, in order to maintain, to the extent practicable, the
general level of reciprocal and mutually advantageous
concessions in the said trade agreement ;
5. Whereas I have found as a fact that under the
circumstances recited above existing duties or other im-
port restrictions of the United States of America or of
Switzerland are unduly burdening and restricting the
foreign trade of the United States of America ;
6. Whereas, pursuant to section 3 (a) of the Trade
Agreements Extension Act of 1951 (65 Stat. 72), I trans-
mitted to the United States Tariff Commission for inves-
tigation and report a list of all articles imported into
the United States of America to be considered for possible
modification of duties and other import restrictions, im-
position of additional import restrictions, or continuance
of existing customs or excise treatment in trade-agreement
negotiations with Switzerland looking towards possible
restoration of the general level of reciprocal and mutually
advantageous concessions in the said trade agreement,
and the said Tariff Commission has made an investiga-
tion in accordance with section 3 of the said Trade Agree-
ments Extension Act and thereafter reported to the Presi-
dent its findings based thereon ;
7. Whereas reasonable public notice of the intention
1 For text, see Bulletin of June 27, 1955, p. 1056.
July 18, 1955
3 20 Fed. Rep. 4561.
3 Bulletin of Aug. 23, 1954, p. 275.
113
to negotiate a supplementary trade agreement with Swit-
zerland was given 4 and the views presented by persons
interested in the negotiation of such supplementary agree-
ment were received and considered ;
8. Whereas, after seeking and obtaining information
and advice with respect thereto from the Departments of
State, Agriculture, Commerce, and Defense, and from
other sources, I entered into a trade agreement on June 8,
1955, with the Swiss Federal Council, further supple-
menting the said trade agreement specified in the first
recital, a copy of which supplementary agreement of
June 8, 1955, including the supplemental schedule 6 an-
nexed thereto, authentic in both the English and French
languages, is annexed to this proclamation ;
9. Whereas I find that the compensatory modifications
provided for in the said supplementary trade agreement
specified in the eighth recital constitute appropriate action
toward maintaining the general level of reciprocal and
mutually advantageous concessions in the said trade agree-
ment specified in the first recital, and that the purpose
set forth in section 350 (a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended, will be promoted by such compensatory modifi-
cations of existing duties and other import restrictions
and continuance of existing customs and excise treatment
as are set forth and provided for in the said supplementary
trade agreement ;
10. Whereas it is provided in paragraph numbered 4
of the said supplementary agreement specified in the
eighth recital that it shall enter into force on July 11, 1955 ;
11. Whereas I find that such modifications of existing
duties and other import restrictions and such continuance
of existing customs and excise treatment of articles as are
hereinafter proclaimed in Part I of this proclamation
will be required or appropriate, on and after July 11,
1955, to carry out the said supplementary trade agreement
specified in the eighth recital ;
12. Whereas, pursuant to the authority vested in the
President by the Constitution and the statutes, including
section 350 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, on
October 30, 1947, he entered into an exclusive trade agree-
ment with the Government of the Republic of Cuba (61
Stat. (pt. 4) 3699), and by Proclamation No. 2764 of
January 1, 1948 (62 Stat. (pt. 2) 1465), he proclaimed
such modifications of existing duties and other import
restrictions of the United States of America in respect
of the Republic of Cuba and such continuance of existing
customs and excise treatment of products of the Republic
of Cuba imported into the United States of America as
were then found to be required or appropriate to carry
out the said exclusive agreement, which proclamation
has been supplemented by Proclamation 2929 of June 2,
1951, (65 Stat. C12) and by the proclamations referred to
in the twelfth recital thereof ; and
13. Whereas I determine that, in view of the finding
set forth in the eleventh recital of this proclamation, the
deletion of the second item 28 (a) (as amended by the
said proclamation of June 2, 1951) from the list set forth
in the ninth recital of the said proclamation of January 1,
4 Ibid., Feb. 28, 1955, p. 359.
5 Schedule not printed.
1948, as amended and rectified, will be required or appro-
priate to carry out the said exclusive trade agreement
specified in the twelfth recital of this proclamation on and
after July 11, 1955:
Now, therefore, I, Dwight D. Eisenhower, President
of the United States of America, acting under and by
virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution
and the statutes, including the said section 350 of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, do proclaim as follows :
PART I
To the end that the said supplementary trade agree-
ment specified in the eighth recital may be carried out,
such modifications of existing duties and other import
restrictions of the United States of America and such
continuance of existing customs or excise treatment of
articles imported into the United States of America as
are provided for in the said supplementary agreement of
June 8, 1955, shall be effective on and after July 11, 1955.
PART II
To the end that the said exclusive trade agreement
specified in the twelfth recital may be carried out, the
list set forth in the ninth recital of the said proclamation
of January 1, 194S, as amended and rectified, shall be
further amended by deleting therefrom the second item
28 (a), as amended by the said proclamation of June 2,
1951, effective on and after July 11, 1955.
In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand
and caused the Seal of the United States of America
to be affixed.
Done at the City of Washington this 25th day of June,
in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred and
[seal] fifty-five, and of the Independence of the United
States of America the one hundred and seventy-
ninth.
By the President:
John Foster Dulles,
Secretary of State.
Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions
Requested by Austria and France
Press release 406 dated June 30
Two more countries — Austria and France — have
requested renegotiations under article XXVIII
of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
(Gatt) of certain tariff concessions granted to
the United States.
At their ninth session, the Contracting Parties
to the Gatt took action to extend the firm life
114
Department of State Bulletin
of the tariff concessions from July 2, 1955, to
December 31, 1957. Prior to such extension, a
country may renegotiate its individual tariff con-
cessions with a view to their modification or with-
drawal. Such renegotiations, if notified by June
30, 1955, may continue through September 30,
1955. Under this procedure these countries have
indicated that they wish to renegotiate certain of
their tariff concessions of interest to the United
States. (As announced previously, Cuba, 1 India, 2
the Netherlands, 2 Nicaragua, 2 Pakistan, 2 and
Sweden 2 have also given notice of intention to re-
negotiate certain of their concessions.)
Under article XXVIII a country wishing to
withdraw or modify a concession first must try
to reach some basis of agreement with other in-
terested Contracting Parties concerning such
withdrawal or modification. The usual basis for
agreement would be the granting of new conces-
sions as compensation for the withdrawn
concession.
Interested persons are invited to submit their
views with regard to the possible effect on U. S.
trade of possible modifications or withdrawals of
the concessions on the items in the attached list.
In addition, views are also desired regarding im-
ports into Austria and France from the United
States on which the United States might request
new or further tariff reductions as compensation
to the United States for any modifications or
withdrawals of concessions on items in the at-
tached list.
Views on the foregoing matters should be sub-
mitted to the Committee for Eeciprocity Informa-
tion, which is the interdepartmental committee
established to receive views on trade agreement
matters. It is requested that any such views be
submitted by the close of business on July 21, 1955.
All communications on these matters, in 15
copies, should be addressed to : The Secretary of
the Committee for Reciprocity Information,
Tariff Commission Building, Washington 25, D. C.
If any interested party considers that his views
cannot be adequately expressed to the committee in
a written brief, he should make this known to the
secretary of the committee, who will then arrange
for oral presentation before the committee.
Items on Which Concessions to the United
States May Be Modified or Withdrawn Under
Article XXVIII of the GATT
Austria
Dried eggs
Soybean and cottonseed oil
Turpentine oil for varnish factories
Wool waste, raw
Viscose rayon for tire cord, single
Fountain pens
Motion picture films, the sound tracks of which have been
dubbed
Penicillin as prepared medicine
Other prepared medicine
Clover seed
Canned green peas, green beans, carrots, spinach, celery,
mushrooms
Elastic woven or netted articles
Articles of artificial horn or artificial resin, except brush
handles, buttons, and fountain pens
Metal cutting saws and nontoothed saw blades
Twist drills, milling cutters, and reamers
Dynamos and electromotors
Electric apparatus and devices, n.s.m.
Certain mathematical and physical instruments
Paraaminosalicylic acid
Note to Class XXXVI : Parts of nonelectrical machinery
except parts for assembly and for sewing and knitting
machines now dutiable in a basket category
France
Grapefruit, fresh or dried, and pomelos dried
Fruit, berry, vegetable juices, sweetened or unsweetened
Ammonium nitrate
Rubber thread, uncovered
Cotton linters, washed, scoured (in the mass, slabs, or
sheets)
Renegotiation off Tariff Concessions
Requested by Finland
Press release 425 dated July 9
Finland has requested renegotiation, under
article XXVIII of the General Agreement on
Tariffs and Trade, of certain tariff concessions
granted to the United States. Earlier announce-
ments have been issued on the intention of Cuba, 1
India, 2 the Netherlands, 2 Nicaragua, 2 Pakistan, 2
Sweden, 2 Austria, 3 and France 3 to renegotiate cer-
tain of their concessions.
At their ninth session, the contracting parties
1 Bulletin of June 27, 1955, p. 1057.
2 Ibid., July 4, 1955, p. 26.
1 Bulletin of June 27, 1955, p. 1057.
2 Ibid., July 4, 1955, p. 26.
8 Page 114.
July 18, 1955
115
to the general agreement took action to extend the
firm life of the tariff concessions from July 2, 1955,
to December 31, 1957. Prior to such extension a
country may renegotiate its individual tariff con-
cessions with a view to their modification or with-
drawal. Such renegotiations, if notified by June
30, 1955, may continue through September 30,
1955. In accordance with this procedure, Finland
has indicated that it wishes to renegotiate certain
of its tariff concessions of interest to the United
States.
Under article XXVIII a country wishing to
withdraw or modify a concession first must try to
reach some basis of agreement with other inter-
ested contracting parties concerning such with-
drawal or modification. The usual basis for agree-
ment would be the granting of new concessions as
compensation for the withdrawn concession.
Interested persons are invited to submit their
views with regard to the possible effect on U.S.
trade of possible modifications or withdrawals of
the concessions on the items in the attached list.
In addition, views are also desired regarding im-
ports into the above-mentioned countries from the
United States on which the United States might
request new or further tariff reductions as compen-
sation to the United States for any modifications
or withdrawals of concessions on items in the at-
tached list.
Views on the foregoing matters should be sub-
mitted to the Committee for Reciprocity Informa-
tion, which is the interdepartmental committee
established to receive views on trade-agreement
matters. It is requested that any such views be
submitted by the close of business on July 30, 1955.
All communications on these matters, in 15
copies, should be addressed to: The Secretary of
the Committee for Reciprocity Information,
Tariff Commission Building, Washington 25, D.C.
If any interested party considers that his views
cannot be adequately expressed to the committee
in a written brief, he should make this known to
the Secretary of the committee who will then
arrange for oral presentation before the Com-
mittee.
List of Tariff Concessions
Preparations and preserves, not including juice, of pine-
apples, grapefruit, pears, apricots, peaches, or mixed
fruits ;
Pineapple and citrus fruit juices ;
Transmission and conveyor belts ;
Fabrics, ribbons, cords, and felts, treated with rubber or
synthetic resins, except pile fabrics ; n. e. s. ;
Stockings, socks, and gloves of artificial silk ;
Drills, except stone drills and rock drills; reamers; mill-
ing cutters, thread stocks, thread dies, and thread taps ;
Files and rasps ;
Compressors and air pumps ;
Mechanical refrigerators ;
Machinery and apparatus, n.e.s. ;
Medical and surgical instruments, and parts thereof.
Modification of Quota
on Clover Seed Imports
WHITE HOUSE ANNOUNCEMENT
White House press release dated June 30
The President on June 29 issued a proclamation
limiting imports of alsike clover seed during each
of the two 12-month periods beginning July 1,
1955, and July 1, 1956, to 2,500,000 pounds dutiable
at 2 cents per pound, imports in excess thereof
during each of the two periods to enter at 6 cents
per pound.
In its supplementary report which was sub-
mitted to the President on April 28, 1955, 1 the
Tariff Commission recommended that the restric-
tions adopted by the President be imposed for
successive 12-month periods indefinitely. The
President, however, limited the effectiveness of his
proclamation to the next two 12-month periods,
or until June 30, 1957.
On June 30, 1954, the President by proclama-
tion imposed a quota of 1,500,000 pounds on im-
ports of alsike clover seed during the year ending
June 30, 1955, such imports to enter at a duty of
2 cents per pound and imports in excess thereof
to be subject to a duty of 6 cents per pound. 2 The
Tariff Commission's latest investigation and re-
port were made pursuant to section 7 of the Trade
Agreements Extension Act and in accordance with
the President's letter of July 14, 1954, in which he
directed the Tariff Commission to continue its in-
vestigation regarding alsike clover seed and to
submit a supplementary report by May 2, 1955.
1 Copies of the report may be obtained from the U.S.
Tariff Commission, Washington 25, D.C.
2 Bulletin of Aug. 2, 1954, p. 167.
116
Department of State Bulletin
PROCLAMATION 3100 '
1. Whereas, pursuant to the authority vested in me by
section 350 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and by
section 7 (c) of the Trade Agreements Extension Act of
1951, as amended, on June 30, 1954, I issued Proclamation
No. 3059 (19 P. R. 4103) modifying item 763 of Part I of
Schedule XX (original) annexed to the General Agree-
ment on Tariffs and Trade so as to provide that not more
than 1,500,000 pounds of alsike clover seed described in the
said item 763 entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption during the 12-month period beginning July 1,
1954, should be dutiable at 2 cents per pound and that any
such seed not subject to the rate of 2 cents per pound
should be dutiable at 6 cents per pound :
2. Whereas, on July 14, 1954, I directed the United
States Tariff Commission to continue its investigation
under section 7 of the Trade Agreements Extension Act
of 1951, as amended, with regard to alsike clover seed, and
to submit to me a supplementary report indicating whether
the Commission considered the continuation of the tariff
quota referred to in the previous recital beyond June 30,
1955, to be necessary to prevent or remedy the serious
injury to the domestic industry concerned which was re-
ported to me by the Commission on May 21, 1954, to exist
by reason of increased imports of such seed ;
3. Whereas, on April 28, 1955, the United States Tariff
Commission reported to me that as a result of its con-
tinued investigation, including a public hearing, it has
found that the continuation beyond June 30, 1955 of a
modified tariff quota on alsike clover seed is necessary to
prevent or remedy the serious injury to the domestic
industry concerned ;
4. Whereas section 350(a)(2) of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended, authorizes the President to proclaim
such modification of existing duties and such additional
import restrictions as are required or appropriate to
carry out any foreign trade agreement that the President
has entered into under the said section 350(a) ; and
5. Whereas I find that tie further modification of the
concession granted in the said General Agreement with
respect to alsike clover seed described in the said item 763
to permit the application to such seed of the duty treat-
ment hereinafter proclaimed is necessary to prevent seri-
ous injury to the domestic industry producing the like
or directly competitive product, and that upon such further
modification of the said concession it will be appropriate
to carry out the said General Agreement to apply to alsike
clover seed the duty treatment hereinafter proclaimed :
Now, therefore, I, Dwight D. Eisenhower, President
of the United States of America, acting under the author-
ity vested in me by section 350 of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended, and by section 7(c) of the Trade Agreements
Extension Act of 1951, as amended, and in accordance
with the provisions of the said General Agreement, do
proclaim — ■
(a) That the provision in the said item 763 with respect
to alsike clover seed shall be further modified during the
period July 1, 1955 to June 30, 1957, both dates inclusive,
to read as follows :
Tariff Act
of 1930,
paragraph
Description of products
Rate of
duty
cents per
pound
763
Grass seeds and other forage crop seeds:
2
Provided, That not more than 2,500,000 pounds
of such seed entered during each 12-month
period beginning July 1 in the years 1955
and 1956 shall be dutiable at 2 cents per
pound. Any such seed entered during any
such period and not subject to the rate of
2 cents per pound shall be dutiable at . . .
6
(b) That during the period July 1, 1955 to June 30,
1957, both dates inclusive, alsike clover seed described in
the said item 763, as modified by paragraph (a) above,
shall be subject to the rates of duty specified in the said
item 763 as so modified.
Proclamation No. 2761A of December 16, 1947, as
amended and supplemented, is modified accordingly during
the period July 1, 1955 to June 30, 1957, both dates
inclusive.
In witness whekeof, I have hereunto set my hand and
caused the seal of the United States of America to be
affixed.
Done at the City of Washington this twenty-ninth day
of June in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred
[seal] and fifty-five, and of the Independence of the
United States of America the one hundred and
seventy-ninth.
/j UL*y /J~ZJU-<^^ Xsk*~>
3 20 Fed. Reg. 4699.
July 18, 7955
By the President :
John Fosteb Dulles
Secretary of State
Quota on Rye Imports
WHITE HOUSE ANNOUNCEMENT
White House press release dated June 30
The President on June 29 issued a proclamation
limiting imports of rye to 186,000,000 pounds dur-
ing each of the nest two 12-month periods begin-
ning July 1, 1955, and July 1, 1956. The Presi-
dent's proclamation also provides for an alloca-
tion of the 186,000,000-pound quota on an histori-
cal basis between Canada, 182,280,000 pounds, and
other foreign countries, 3,720,000 pounds. Not
117
more than 15,000 pounds of the total permissible
imports may be of rye flour or rye meal.
In its report to the President, the Tai*iff Com-
mission recommended a quota of 95,200,000 pounds
to be imposed indefinitely for succeeding 12-month
periods. 1 The President, however, continued the
limitation on imports of rye at the current level of
186,000,000 pounds and limited the effectiveness of
his proclamation to the next two 12-month periods,
or until June 30, 1957.
The Tariff Commission's investigation and re-
port were made pursuant to section 22 of the Agri-
cultural Adjustment Act, as amended, which au-
thorizes limitations on imports when imports are
interfering with or threaten to interfere with do-
mestic price-support programs. The Tariff Com-
mission found that continued restrictions on im-
ports of rye were necessary to protect the Depart-
ment of Agriculture's price-support program for
rye.
The President's proclamation does not apply to
imports of certified or registered seed rye for seed-
ing and crop-improvement purposes entered in
accordance with safeguards prescribed in the
proclamation.
The Tariff Commission's report resulted from
an investigation requested by the President on
May 20, 1955. 2 The Tariff Commission's report
was submitted to the President on June 24, 1955.
PROCLAMATION 3101 3
Whereas, pursuant to section 22 of the Agricultural
Adjustment Act, as added by section 31 of the act of
August 24, 1935, 49 Stat 773, reenacted by section 1 of
the act of June 3, 1937, 50 Stat. 246, and as amended by
section 3 of the act of July 3, 1948, 62 Stat. 1248, section 3
of the act of June 28, 1950, 64 Stat. 261, and section 8(b)
of the act of June 16, 1951, 65 Stat. 72 (7 U.S.C. 624), the
Secretary of Agriculture advised me there was reason to
believe that rye, rye flour, and rye meal are practically
certain to be imported into the United States after June
30, 1955, under such conditions and in such quantities as
to render or tend to render ineffective, or materially inter-
fere with, the price-support program undertaken by the
Department of Agriculture with respect to rye pursuant to
sections 301 and 401 of the Agricultural Act of 1949, as
amended, or to reduce substantially the amount of prod-
ucts processed in the United States from domestic rye
'Copies of the report may be obtained from the U.S.
Tariff Commission, Washington 25, D. C.
'Bulletin of July 4, 1955, p. 28.
3 20 Fed. Reg. 4701.
with respect to which such program of the Department of
Agriculture is being undertaken;
Whereas, on May 20, 1955, I caused the United States
Tariff Commission to make an investigation under the
said section 22 with respect to this matter ;
Whereas, the said Tariff Commission has made such
investigation and has reported to me its findings and
recommendations made in connection therewith ;
Whereas, on the basis of the said investigation and
report of the Tariff Commission, I find that rye, rye flour,
and rye meal, in the aggregate, are practically certain to
be imported into the United States after June 30, 1955,
under such conditions and in such quantities as to inter-
fere materially with and to tend to render ineffective the
said price-support program with respect to rye, and to
reduce substantially the amount of products processed in
the United States from domestic rye with respect to which
said price-support program is being understaken ; and
Whereas I find and declare that the imposition of the
quantitative limitations hereinafter proclaimed is shown
by such investigation of the Tariff Commission to be neces-
sary in order that the entry, or withdrawal from ware-
house, for consumption after June 30, 1955, of rye, rye
flour, and rye meal will not render ineffective, or mate-
rially interfere with, the said price-support program :
Now, therefore, I, Dwtght D. Eisenhower, President
of the United States of America, acting under and by
virtue of the authority vested in me by the said section
22 of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, as amended, do
hereby proclaim that —
(1) the total aggregate quantity of rye, rye flour, and
rye meal which may be entered, or withdrawn from ware-
house, for consumption in each of the 12-month periods
beginning July 1 in 1955 or in 1956 shall not exceed
186,000,000 pounds, of which not more than 15,000 pounds
may be in the form of rye flour or rye meal, which per-
missible total quantities I find and declare to be propor-
tionately not less than 50 per centum of the total quantity
of such rye, rye flour, and rye meal entered, or withdrawn
from warehouse, for consumption during the represen-
tative period July 1, 1950 to June 30, 1953, inclusive, and
(2) during each such 12-month period, of the foregoing
permissible total quantity not more than 182,280,000
pounds shall be imported from Canada and not more than
3,720,000 pounds shall be imported from other foreign
countries.
The provisions of this proclamation shall not apply to
certified or registered seed rye for use for seeding and
crop-improvement purposes, in bags tagged and sealed by
an officially recognized seed-certifying agency of the
country of production, if —
(a) the individual shipment amounts to 100 bushels (of
56 pounds each ) or less, or
(b) the individual shipment amounts to more than 100
bushels (of 56 pounds each) and the written approval of
the Secretary of Agriculture or his designated representa-
tive is presented at the time of entry, or bond is furnished
in a form prescribed by the Commissioner of Customs in
an amount equal to the value of the merchandise as set
forth in the entry, plus the estimated duty as determined
118
Department of State Bulletin
at the time of entry, conditioned upon the production of
such written approval within six months from the date
of entry.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and
caused the seal of the United States of America to be
affixed.
Done at the City of Washington this twenty-ninth day
of June in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred
[seal] and fifty-five, and of the Independence of the
United States of America the one hundred and
seventy-ninth.
By the President:
John Foster Dulles
Secretary of State
Study of Domestic Tuna Industry
Press release 374 dated June 21
A delegation representing the California Com-
mission on Interstate Cooperation, composed of
California State officials accompanied by repre-
sentatives of the canning and fishing segments of
the tuna industry and of the Council of State
Governments, called on Under Secretary Hoover
and other officials of the U.S. Government on
June 20 to discuss the situation which has arisen
in the industry in California. Maurice C. Spar-
ling, chairman of the Commission, and Vincent
Thomas, vice chairman of the Commission, headed
the delegation. The delegation was accompanied
by Representative Robert C. Wilson of the Thir-
tieth Congressional District of California and
Merrell F. Small, administrative assistant to
Senator Thomas Kuchel.
In addition to representatives of the Department
of State, representatives of the Departments of
Interior, Commerce, and Treasury were also
present to meet with members of the delegation.
Various related aspects of the tuna situation in
California were discussed. The delegation pre-
sented information bearing on the matter and ad-
vanced a number of suggestions to deal with the
situation. The Government representatives indi-
cated that this matter is now under immediate and
active study by the executive branch. It is ex-
pected that this study will be completed in the
very near future.
The delegation is planning to meet further with
other agencies of the Government to consider the
situation in the tuna industry in California.
THE CONGRESS
Return of German and Japanese
Vested Assets
Following is the text of a letter from Secretary
Dulles to Congressman James F. Richards, chair-
man of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
June 30, 1955
Dear Mr. Richards: I refer to Mr. Morton's
letter of March 30, 1955, on the subject of H. J.
Res. 265, which provides for full compensation
for vested German and Japanese assets. 1 In his
letter he described a proposal dealing with vested
assets and war claims held by American nationals
against Germany which had been discussed with
the Governments of the Federal German Republic
and of Japan and said that recommendations for
legislation embodying the proposal would be for-
warded to the Congress. It was requested in that
letter that consideration of H. J. Res. 265 be de-
ferred until the legislation referred to had been
prepared.
A draft of the legislation was sent to the Con-
gress on June 6, 1955, accompanied by my letter
in which the background of the proposal was set
forth in detail. The legislation was introduced
in the House as H. R. 6730 and in the Senate as
S. 2227. A copy of my letter and an accompany-
ing memorandum commenting on the specific pro-
visions of the proposed draft appear in the Con-
gressional Record for June 14, 1955 at pages
6872 ff. Copies of the letter and memorandum
are enclosed for your convenience. 2
'For background, see Bulletin of July 12, 1954, p. 69;
Nov. 8, 1954, p. 6S0 ; Feb. 21, 1955, p. 290 ; Mar. 14, 1955,
pp. 437, 43S ; and May 23, 1955, p. 848.
2 Not printed here.
July 18, 1955
119
PI. R. 6730 provides for a limited return of Ger-
man and Japanese assets to natural persons up to
a maximum of $10,000 per individual. It also
provides for the return of trademarks and copy-
rights, and of assets of educational, charitable, and
religious organizations. It is estimated that the
cost of the return program can be covered out of
assets presently held by the Attorney General.
The bill also establishes a fund for the compen-
sation of war claims of American nationals against
Germany. The compensation payable to any
single claimant probably would not exceed $10,000.
The fund is the equivalent of funds derived from
vested German assets used for other purposes un-
der the War Claims Act of 1948.
In a letter to the Chancellor of the Federal Ger-
man Republic on August 7, 1954 3 the President
referred to hardships which arose on the one hand
out of the vesting program in the United States
and on the other out of the absence of compensa-
tion for war claims of American nationals against
Germany. The President said that none of the
bills then pending in Congress with regard to the
return of vested assets had the approval of his
Administration. He expressed the hope that an
equitable and satisfactory solution could be
achieved.
The agencies which formulated the proposal
contained in H.R. 6730 estimated that it would
provide for a full return to approximately 90%
of the former owners of vested assets, and con-
sider that it would achieve the equitable solution
sought by the President. It represents the con-
sidered position of the Administration, and it is
hoped that the proposal will be acted upon
promptly and favorably by the Congress.
In providing for full compensation for vested
assets, H.J. Res. 265, on the other hand, does not
differ materially from bills introduced in the pre-
vious Congress, providing for a full return of
vested assets to which the President referred in
his letter of August 7, 1954, stating that such bills
did not meet with the approval of his Adminis-
tration. The payment, as a matter of grace, of
full compensation for vested German and Japa-
nese assets would require the appropriation of
substantial sums. Inasmuch as the Congress has
already authorized the expenditure of $225 million
of the proceeds derived from vested assets for
war claims, the net burden upon the taxpayer
would be heavy. At the same time, no provision
is made for the compensation of war claims of
American nationals against Germany. For these
reasons, the Department is unable to recommend
that H.J. Res. 265 receive favorable consideration.
The Bureau of the Budget advises that there is
no objection to the submission of this report.
Sincerely yours,
John Foster Dulles
Enclosures :
1. From the Secretary dated June 6.
2. Explanatory Memorandum on Draft Bill.
Department's Views on
Sugar Legislation
Statement oy Henri/ F. Holland
Assistant Secretary for Inter- American Affairs 1
Sugar is of very great importance in United
States relations with a large number of foreign
countries, especially the Latin American coun-
tries. The State Department therefore greatly
appreciates the opportunity to comment on the
question of sugar legislation which you are now
considering.
The Department's general position is contained
in its report on H. R. 5406. As was indicated in
the report, the Department recognizes that the
domestic sugar industry faces a serious problem in
the disposal of surplus stocks. The Department is
also sympathetic toward the desire of domestic
producers to share in the growth of the domestic
market. The Department believes that a con-
siderable measure of relief could be afforded the
domestic industry during the fiscal year begin-
ning July 1, 1955, through Government purchase
of sugar for use in foreign relief programs. The
Department is also in favor of permitting do-
mestic producers to share in increases of sugar
consumption in the United States beginning Jan-
uary 1, 1956, and measuring increases in consump-
tion from the level of 8,350,000 tons. The De-
partment believes, however, that the proposed
8 Ibid., Aug. 23, 1954, p.
120
1 Made before the House Committee on Agriculture on
June 22 (press release 377) regarding H. R. 5406, "A Bill
To Amend the Sugar Act of 1948, as Amended."
Department of State Bulletin
legislation should not take effect before January 1,
1956, and that increases in consumption should not
be measured from a level lower than 8,350,000 tons.
The principal questions raised by the proposed
legislation for the Department are:
1. The time when it should take effect.
2. The extent to which domestic producers
should share in increased consumption.
3. The way in which the sugar which is to be
supplied by foreign countries should be shared
among such countries.
The Time When Legislation Should Take Effect
To change the legislation to take effect before
January 1, 1956, would mean a worsening of the
position of foreign producers in this market with
regard to sugar they have already produced in the
expectation of selling it here in accordance with
legislation which still has more than iy 2 years
to run; to measure "increases in consumption"
from a level less than 8,350,000 tons would, in fact,
give a retroactive effect to the legislation, since
sugar consumption in the United States will un-
doubtedly reach the level of 8,350,000 tons before
the end of the present year, if it has not already
done so.
Although Congress may, of course, alter sugar
legislation at any time, it is the Department's be-
lief that Members of the Congress, even in the
absence of State Department recommendations,
would wish to take the following into account in
deciding whether to give a retroactive effect to
the legislation :
1. Since 1937 sugar legislation has customarily
been enacted for 4- or 5-year periods and has been
allowed to run its course without substantial modi-
fication during such periods.
2. Foreign countries whose exports of sugar to
the United States are limited by the Sugar Act
have come to rely on the stability of our sugar
policy over these 4- or 5-year periods.
3. Frequent references have been made, during
previous congressional hearings and debates on
sugar legislation, to the need for providing legis-
lation, in advance, for a term of years in order
that domestic and foreign producers may plan
their production with greater assurance. To
change the legislation to take effect this year
would, of course, mean worsening of the position of
foreign producers in this market with regard to
sugar which they have already produced in the
expectation of selling it here.
4. The structure of the quota system under the
present act, with fixed quotas for domestic areas
and with foreign producers meeting residual
requirements, was established in 1947, to become
effective in 1948, on the initiative of our domestic
sugar producers-
5. Other domestic producers volunteered in
1951, when the act was revised, to have their quotas
remain unchanged if something could be done to
increase the quota of Puerto Rico, one of the do-
mestic areas.
6. The duration of the Sugar Act was an in-
tegral part of the "package" which the executive
branch recommended in 1951 as an equitable com-
promise between foreign and domestic producers
supplying this market, and the testimony on be-
half of the executive branch indicated its expecta-
tion that the act would remain in effect for a 4-
year period.
Sharing Increases in Consumption
There are also a number of considerations which
support the view that it would be undesirable for
new sugar legislation to accord less favorable
quotas to foreign producers than those being rec-
ommended by the executive branch. These include
the following:
1. Any reduction in the foreign share of our
sugar market will involve a loss for the United
States which is at least as large as the amount of
the reduction. For example, our exports and our
production for export will be less by virtually the
same dollar amount. Since almost every State in
the Union produces articles that are exported to
Cuba and other foreign countries which ship
sugar to the United States, a reduction of our pur-
chases of their sugar would be a serious matter to
our export trade and would affect many United
States industries throughout the entire country.
Generally speaking, the prosperity of our export
industries depends on the ability of foreign pur-
chasers to buy our goods; and this, in turn, de-
pends on the number of dollars which these coun-
tries can obtain by selling their products in the
United States market. The dollars which Cuba
and other foreign countries receive for sugar sold
in the United States are returned almost imme-
diately in payment for such products as pork, rice,
July 18, 7955
121
apples, and manufactures of various types. Most
of the countries which sell sugar to the United
States have an unfavorable trade balance with
the United States. They wish to buy an increased
volume of our export products but are able to do so
only by increasing their sales here.
2. To adopt legislation less favorable than that
recommended by the executive branch would mean
a further worsening of economic conditions in
Cuba. Cuba's sugar production has already been
reduced from 8,000,000 short tons in 1952 to 5,-
000,000 short tons in 1955. Cuba is financing a
very large surplus of sugar of 1,200,000 short tons.
The Cuban Government estimates that, because
of the cutback already made in its sugar produc-
tion, salaries in the industry have had to be re-
duced by approximately 13 percent. The take-
home pay of workers has been reduced by a fur-
ther 27 percent cut during the "dead season." Any
action on our part which would materially worsen
Cuba's present economic position would, of course,
mean reduced public support in Cuba for that
Government's present policy of close cooperation
with the United States. It would also mean
strengthening the hand of 25,000 active Commu-
nists in Cuba just after the Cuban Government
has established a new organization for the repres-
sion of Communist activities.
Sharing the Foreign Quota
Principally because of the quota system, the
price of sugar in the United States market is usu-
ally considerably higher than in the world mar-
ket. Last year domestic prices exceeded world
prices by an average of approximately 2 cents
per pound, or the equivalent of about 60 percent
of the world market price during the year. Fur-
thermore, foreign sugar consumed in the United
States receives tax and tariff treatment which
varies widely depending upon the area in which
it is produced.
In view of the price at which sugar sells in the
United States in comparison with the price it
brings in the world market, it is only natural that
foreign suppliers should urge that their quotas
be increased. It is also not surprising, in view
of the difference in quota and tariff treatment
accorded to different foreign suppliers, that many
of the suppliers should believe that they are re-
ceiving less favorable treatment than is accorded
to other suppliers. The Department has received
communications from a considerable number of
foreign governments during the past year while
possible revision of the Sugar Act has been under
consideration. These communications have come
from Cuba and the Philippines, our largest and
second-largest foreign suppliers, respectively.
Communications have also been received from a
number of the governments of the full-duty coun-
tries, including Peru, the Dominican Eepublic,
Mexico, Formosa, and Panama.
The position of the executive branch to the ef-
fect that domestic producers should be permitted
to share in increases in consumption above the
level of 8,350,000 tons to the extent of 55 percent
is, of course, now known to governments of these
countries. Cuba is urging that increases in con-
sumption continue to be divided on the basis of
96 percent to Cuba and 4 percent to the full-duty
countries. The full-duty countries are alleging
that they have always been discriminated against
in relation to Cuba and the Philippines, and they
are urging that they be given greatly increased
quotas. Some of these countries which have been
unable, because of the restriction on imports of
sugar contained in the Sugar Act, to establish a
record of supplying sugar to this market over any
considerable period of time, such as Formosa and
Panama, are pressing for quotas that are very
large in relation to the small quantities which they
have shipped to us in the past.
The Philippines, which has a maximum quota
of 977,000 tons, raw value, as provided in the Phil-
ippine Trade Act of 1946, is urging that they also
be given the right to participate in increases in
consumption, stating that their quota should not
be the only one, foreign or domestic, which is not
increased. The revised Philippine Trade Act,
now pending before Congress, would remove the
present maximum limitation on the Philippine
quota. 2 Philippine sugar is not now subject to
duty but is scheduled, under the new Trade Act,
to begin paying a nominal rate of duty in 1956,
equal to 5 percent of the rate applicable to sugar
from Cuba. This is to be increased to 10 percent
of the Cuban rate in 1959 and to 20 percent in
1962.
The decision concerning the relative shares of
2 For a statement on the proposed revision of the Phil-
ippine Trade Act by William J. Sebald, Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Far Eastern Affairs, see Bulletin of June
13, 1955, p. 971.
122
Department of Stale Bulletin
the foreign suppliers should, of course, be made
on the basis of standards which can be applied
as uniformly as possible among the various coun-
tries. The decision must also be made within the
framework of the decision which will be taken
regarding the recommendation of the executive
branch that increases in consumption should be
shared by domestic producers.
The recommendation that domestic producers be
permitted to share in increases in future con-
sumption beginning January 1, 1956, to the extent
of 55 percent of such increases will mean that the
share of Cuba and the full-duty countries will be
reduced to 45 percent, at the maximum. Most of
this reduction will, of course, be borne by Cuba.
Furthermore, Cuba and the full-duty countries to-
gether will lose to domestic producers an estimated
80,000 to 100,000 tons of sugar during 1956 which
would have gone to them under present legislation.
Any increase in the share of the full-duty countries
would reduce Cuba's share further. It is believed,
nevertheless, that the share of the full-duty coun-
tries is so small in relation to the share of Cuba
and the Philippines (because of favorable treat-
ment accorded by us in the past to the latter two
countries) that the participation of the full-duty
countries in increases in consumption should be
materially increased beginning January 1, 1957.
The Department does not recommend an in-
crease in the Philippine quota at this time. The
Department believes, however, as is indicated in
its report on H. E. 5106, that consideration should
be given to allowing the Philippines to share in
increased consumption when sugar legislation is
next amended and after sugar from the Philip-
pines begins to pay a tariff.
Dividing the quota of the full-duty countries
among such countries involves a problem some-
what like that of dividing the quota for foreign
countries other than the Philippines among Cuba
and the full-duty countries. As was suggested
earlier, some of the full-duty countries have been
unable, because of the limitations imposed by the
Sugar Act, to establish any record as a substantial
supplier of sugar to the United States market.
The Department believes that special considera-
tion should be given to the countries in this group
which, during the past 2 years, have taken full
advantage of the provision of the act which per-
mits them to supply 1,000 tons of sugar to this
market on a first-come, first-sei*ved basis. The
Department supports the proposal contained in the
legislation being submitted by the Department
of Agriculture which would triple the amount of
sugar that such countries can supply.
TREATY INFORMATION
Current Actions
MULTILATERAL
Aviation
Protocol amending article 45 of Convention on Interna-
tional Civil Aviation (TIAS 1581) which provides for
the permanent seat of ICAO. Done at Montreal June
14, 1954. 1
Ratifications deposited: Egypt, March 15, 1955; Luxem-
bourg, March 17, 1955; Iraq, March 25, 1955.
Protocol relating to certain amendments to the Conven-
tion on International Civil Aviation (TIAS 1581), pro-
viding that sessions of the ICAO Assembly shall be held
not less than once in 3 years instead of annually. Done
at Montreal June 14, 1954. 1
Ratifications deposited: Egypt, March 15, 1955; Luxem-
bourg, March 17, 1955; Iraq, March 25, 1955; Aus-
tralia, April 22, 1955.
Property
Convention for the protection of industrial property.
Signed at London June 2, 1934. Entered into force
August 1, 1938. 53 Stat. 1748.
Adherences effective: Mexico, July 14, 1955; Italy, July
15, 1955.
War
Geneva convention relative to treatment of prisoners of
war. Dated at Geneva August 12, 1949. Entered into
force October 21, 1950. 2
Senate advice and consent to ratification given (with a
statement): July 6, 1955.
Ratified by the President: July 14, 1955.
Geneva convention for amelioration of the condition of
the wounded and sick in armed forces in the field.
Dated at Geneva August 12, 1949. Entered into force
October 21, 1950.=
Senate advice and consent to ratification given (with a
reservation and a statement ) : July 6, 1955.
Ratified by the President: July 14, 1955.
Geneva convention for amelioration of the condition of
wounded, sick and shipwrecked members of armed
forces at sea. Dated at Geneva August 12, 1949. En-
tered into force October 21, 1950. 2
Senate advice and consent to ratification given (with a
statement) : July 6, 1955.
Ratified by the President: July 14, 1955.
Geneva convention relative to protection of civilian per-
sons in time of war. Dated at Geneva August 12, 1949.
Entered into force October 21, 1950. 2
Senate advice and consent to ratification given (with
the reservation made at time of signing and with a
statement) : July 6, 1955.
Ratified by the President: July 14, 1955.
' Not in force.
" Not in force for the United States.
July 7 8, J 955
123
BILATERAL
Austria
Agricultural commodities agreement. Signed at Vienna
June 14, 1955. Entered into force June 14, 1955.
Luxembourg
Agreement relating to war damage to private property.
Effected by exchange of notes at Luxembourg June 15,
1955. Entered into force June 15, 1955.
Yugoslavia
Agreement providing for the furnishing of additional
wheat to Yugoslavia. Effected by exchange of notes at
Belgrade May 12, 1955. Entered into force May 12,
1955.
Agreement relating to the disbursement of dinars made
available for the procurement of certain agricultural
commodities. Effected by exchange of notes at Bel-
grade May 12, 1955. Entered into force May 12, 1955.
Agreement relating to the use of economic assistance funds
for the financing of wheat purchases. Effected by ex-
change of notes at Belgrade May 12, 1955. Entered
into force May 12, 1955.
THE DEPARTMENT
ICA Set Up in Department of State
The Department of State announced on June
30 {press release 4.09) that Secretary Dulles had
issued an order establishing the International Co-
operation Administration effective at the close of
business on June 30, 1955. Pursuant to the Pres-
ident's Executive Order 10610 of May 9, 1955, 1
this Administration, under the direction and con-
trol of the Secretary of State, will carry out the
functions previously exercised by the Foreign Op-
erations Administration under the Mutual Secu-
rity Act of 1951f. and related acts and executive
orders, except for certain functions transferred to
the Department of Defense. Secretary Dulles'
order maintains in the International Cooperation
Administration and its Director, John B. Hol-
lister, essentially the same functions as have been
carried out by the Foreign Operations Adminis-
tration under Harold E. Stassen. The text of
the order follows:
1 Bulletin of May 30, 1955, p. 889.
124
Establishment of International Cooperation
Administration and Delegation of Certain Related
Functions
Department circular 156 dated 1 June 30
By virtue of the authority vested in me by
Executive Order No. 10610, the Mutual Security
Act of 1954 (68 Stat. 832), and section 4 of the
act of May 26, 1949 (63 Stat. Ill, 5 U. S. C. sec.
151c), and in accordance with the requirements of
section 3(a) ( 1 ) of Public Law 404, 79th Congress
(60 Stat. 238, 5 U. S. C. sec. 1002 (a) (1) ), estab-
lishment of the International Cooperation Admin-
istration is effected and assignment of mutual
security and related functions and delegations of
authority are made as follows :
1. Establishment of the International Coopera-
tion Administration. There is established in the
Department of State an agency which shall be
known as the International Cooperation Admin-
istration. The Institute of Inter-American Af-
fairs, the Office of Small Business provided for in
section 504 (b) of the Mutual Security Act of
1954, and the International Development Advi-
sory Board shall be a part of or attached to the
International Cooperation Administration.
2. The Director of the International Coopera-
tion Administration. As provided in section 103
(a) of Executive Order No. 10610 the Interna-
tional Cooperation Administration shall be headed
by the Director of the International Cooperation
Administration.
3. Functions Delegated to the International, Go-
operation Administration or the Director Thereof.
a. The Director of the International Cooperation
Administration shall, under the direction and con-
trol of the Secretary of State, carry out the fol-
lowing functions:
(1) the functions which section 103 (a) of
Executive Order No. 10610 directs be carried out
by or under the Administration or the Director;
(2) the functions under the Mutual Defense
Assistance Control Act of 1951 transferred to the
Secretary of State by section 101 of Executive
Order No. 10610;
(3) subject to consultation with the Secretary
of Defense and the concurrence of the Secretary
of State, (a) the function of having primary re-
sponsibility for preparation and presentation to
the Congress of such programs of foreign military,
economic, and technical assistance as may be re-
quired in the interest of the security of the United
Department of State Bulletin
States; (b) the function of coordination referred
to in section 102 (c) (1) of Executive Order No.
10575; (c) the function of determining the value
of the program for any country under chapter 1
of title I of the Mutual Security Act of 1954 (re-
lating to military assistance) ; and (d) the func-
tion of determining the value of the program for
any country under so much of chapter 2 of title I
of the Mutual Security Act of 1954 as pertains
to the functions transferred to the Secretary of
Defense and the Department of Defense by section
201 of Executive Order No. 10610 (relating to
assistance directly to military forces).
b. Nothing in this order shall be construed to
derogate from any authority, responsibilities or
functions previously held or exercised by the Sec-
retary of State or the various bureaus and other
offices of the Department of State.
If,. Functions Reserved to the Secretary of State.
The responsibility for coordinating the functions
of the International Cooperation Administration
with other affairs of the Department of State is
hereby reserved to the Secretary of State.
5. Records, Property, Personnel, Positions, and
Funds. The records, property, personnel, posi-
tions, and unexpended balances of appropriations,
allocations, and other funds of the Foreign Opera-
tions Administration transferred to the Depart-
ment of State by section 302 of Executive Order
No. 10610 are hereby placed in the International
Cooperation Administration. Nothing in this sec-
tion shall be construed to derogate from the au-
thority of the Secretary of State within the terms
of Executive Order No. 10610 to place elsewhere
in the Department of State at a later date or dates
records, property, personnel, positions and funds
which relate to functions which are not to be per-
formed by the International Cooperation Admin-
istration or the Director thereof.
6. Successor ship. Except as may be otherwise
provided from time to time, and consistent with
law and with Executive Order No. 10610, the In-
ternational Cooperation Administration and the
Director thereof shall be deemed to be the succes-
sors of the Foreign Operations Administration
and the Director thereof, respectively, in respect
to all functions required to be carried out by or
under the International Cooperation Administra-
tion or the Director thereof pursuant to section
103 (a ) of Executive Order No. 10610, or delegated
to the Administration or the Director by the Sec-
retary of State.
7. Effective Date. a. This order shall become
effective immediately upon the coming into effect
of Executive Order No. 10610.
b. Nothing in this order shall be construed to
derogate from the authority of the Secretary of
State to amend this order at any time.
John Foster Dulles
Secretary of State
Resignations
David McK. Key, Assistant Secretary for International
Organization Affairs, effective July 31.
Designations
James A. McDevitt as Director, Executive Staff, Office
of the Assistant Secretary for Economic Affairs, effective
July 5.
THE FOREIGN SERVICE
Ninth Foreign Service
Selection Boards Meet
Press release 391 dated June 27
The Ninth Foreign Service Selection Boards
convened in Washington for their initial joint
meeting on June 27. The boards will be in session
about 2 months.
The duty of the five boards is to evaluate the
performance of all members of the Foreign Serv-
ice Officer Corps for purposes of promotion, selec-
tion-out, training, and assignment. Each board
is composed of career Foreign Service officers,
public members, and nonvoting observers from the
Departments of Labor and Commerce.
The members and observers were welcomed and
addressed by Loy Henderson, Deputy Under Sec-
retary of State for Administration, and George
Wilson, Assistant Controller for Personnel.
A list of members and observers for each of the
five boards follows :
July 18, 7955
125
1955
NINTH FOREIGN SERVICE SELECTION BOARDS
Rodney L. Mott
Board A
Christian M. Ravndal
Herbert S. Bursley . .
John D. Hickerson . .
Adam Sutcliffe .
John Brophy
FSO-Career Minister,
Minister to Hungary
FSO-Career Minister,
Foreign Service Inspector
FSO-Career Minister,
Deputy for Foreign Affairs,
National War College
Inventor, former treasurer
and general manager, The
Adam Sutcliffe Company
Coordinator, C.I.O. World
Labor Fund
Professor of Political Science
and Director, Division of So-
cial Science, Colgate Uni-
versity
Observers
Department of Commerce
Department of Labor
Serge G. Koushnareff, Deputy
Director, Transportation and
Utilities Division, Bureau of
Foreign Commerce
Samuel M. Justice, Chief,
International Branch, Bu-
reau of Apprenticeship
E. Willis Whited (alternate),
Assistant Chief, Interna-
tional Branch, Bureau of Ap-
prenticeship
Observers
Board D
Department of Labor
Department of Commerce
Herman B. Byer, Assistant
Commissioner, Bureau of
Labor Statistics
G. Harold Keatley, Liaison
Officer, Foreign Service Op-
erations, Bureau of Foreign
Commerce
Board B
Lester D. Mallory . .
John Wesley Jones . .
John H. Burns
George J. Richardson
FSO-1, Ambassador to Jor-
dan
FSO-1, Director, Office of
Western European Affairs
FSO-2, Consul General at
Frankfort
Secretary-Treasurer, Inter-
national Association of Fire
Fighters, American Federa-
tion of Labor
Observers
Department of Commerce
Department of Labor
G. Harold Keatley, Liaison
Officer, Foreign Service Op-
erations, Bureau of Foreign
Commerce
Frederick R. Schoenborn,
Chief, Division of Labor
Clearance and Immigration,
Bureau of Employment Secu-
rity
Board G
E. Tomlin Bailey FSO-1, Counselor of Embassy
at London, Supervising Con-
sul General for the United
Kingdom
Aaron S. Brown FSO-2, Counselor of Embassy
at Lisbon
Edward E. Rice . . . .
Leon L. Cowles . . . .
Wilson T. M. Beale, Jr.
Herbert M. Bratter
FSO-2, Consul General at
Stuttgart
FSO-2, Foreign Service In-
spector
FSO-2, Officer - in - Charge,
United Kingdom and Ireland
Affairs, Bureau of European
Affairs
Author, free-lance writer, and
consultant on international
financial and economic affairs
Observers
Department of Commerce
Department of Labor
Constance R. Harvey
Houston S. Lay ....
Don V. Catlett
Francis E. Simmons
Arley Caudill, Country Desk
Officer for Spain and Portu-
gal, European Division, Bu-
reau of Foreign Commerce
. Mrs. Margaret Sheridan, De-
partment of State Liaison
Officer, Office of International
Trade
Board E
. FSO-2, First Secretary of
Embassy and Consul at Bonn
. FSO-2, Deputy Director, Of-
fice of Special Consular Serv-
ices
. FSO-3, International Econo-
mist, Office of Philippine and
Southeast Asian Affairs, Bu-
reau of Far Eastern Affairs
. Manager, Washington office,
American Viscose Corpora-
tion
Observer
Department of Commerce.
Serge G. Koushnareff, Dep-
uty Director, Transportation
and Utilities Division, Bureau
of Foreign Commerce
126
Department of Sfofe Bulletin
July 18, 1955
Agriculture. Department's Views on Sugar Legislation
(Holland)
American Republics. Importance of International Travel
in Advancing World Peace (Weeks)
Austria
Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested by Austria
and France
U.S. Deposits Ratification of Austrian State Treaty . . .
Burma. Visit of D Nu, Prime Minister of Burma (texts
of addresses, letter, and joint statement)
Claims and Property. Return of German and Japanese
Vested Assets (text of letter)
Congress, The
Department's Views on Sugar Legislation (Holland) . .
Return of German and Japanese Vested Assets (text of
letter)
Visit of U Nu, Prime Minister of Burma (texts of ad-
dresses, letter, and joint statement)
Economic Affairs
Department's Views on Sugar Legislation (Holland) . .
The Foreign Trade Policy of the U.S. (Thibodeaux) . .
Importance of International Travel in Advancing World
Peace (Weeks)
Modification of Quota on Clover Seed Imports (text of
proclamation)
Quota on Rye Imports (text of proclamation)
Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested by Austria
and France
Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested by Finland .
Study of Domestic Tuna Industry
Supplementary Trade Agreement With Switzerland (text
of proclamation)
Finland. Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested
by Finland
Foreign Service. Ninth Foreign Service Selection Boards
Meet
France. Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested by
Austria and France
Germany. Return of German and Japanese Vested Assets
(text of letter)
Greece. Special Aid to Greece To Repair Earthquake
Damage
International Organizations and Meetings. U.S. Delega-
tions to International Conferences (20th Session,
ECOSOC)
Israel. American-Israel Friendship (Brownell) ....
Japan. Return of German and Japanese Vested Assets
(text of letter)
Military Affairs. Shooting Down of U.S. Plane by Soviet
Aircraft (texts of U.S. note and Soviet memo-
randum)
Mutual Security
ICA Set Up in Department of State (text of order) . . .
Special Aid to Greece To Repair Earthquake Damage . .
Presidential Documents
Modification of Quota on Clover Seed Imports
Quota on Rye Imports
Supplementary Trade Agreement With Switzerland . . .
Visit of U Nu, Prime Minister of Burma
Protection of U.S. Nationals and Property. Shooting Down
of U.S. Plane by Soviet Aircraft (texts of U.S. note
and Soviet memorandum) .
Refugees and Displaced Persons. Refugee Ships Begin Series
of Trips
Rumania. Restrictions on Photography and Sketching by
Rumanians in U.S. (texts of U.S. and Rumanian
notes)
State, Department of
Changes in Regulations on Issuance of Nonimmigrant
Visas
Designations (McDevitt)
Documentation Required for Unofficial Visitors to U.S.
(text of U.S. note)
How We Work With Other Nations (Simmons) ....
ICA Set Up in Department of State (text of order) . . .
Index
Vol. XXXIII, No. 838
120
106
114
94
95
119
120
119
95
120
110
106
116
117
114
115
119
113
115
125
114
119
100
109
97
119
100
124
100
116
118
113
95
100
99
105
108
125
104
91
124
Opening of the Public Exhibit of the Seal of the United
States (Dulles)
Resignations (Key)
Switzerland. Supplementary Trade Agreement With Swit-
zerland (text of proclamation)
Treaty Information
Current Actions
Renegotiation of Tariff Concessions Requested by Finland .
Supplementary Trade Agreement With Switzerland (text
of proclamation)
U.S. Deposits Ratification of Austrian State Treaty . . .
U.S.S.R.
Documentation Required for Unofficial Visitors to U.S.
(text of U.S. note)
Protest Against Expulsion of American Priest From Mos-
cow (texts of U.S. and Soviet notes)
Shooting Down of U.S. Plane by Soviet Aircraft (texts of
U.S. note and Soviet memorandum)
United Nations
U.S. Delegations to International Conferences (20th Ses-
sion, ECOSOC)
U.S. Representative on ECOSOC (Baker) Confirmed by
Senate
94
125
113
123
115
113
94
104
102
100
109
109
Name Index
Baker, John C
Bissonnette, Rev. Georges
Brownell, Herbert, Jr. .
Dulles. Secretary
109
102
97
94, 119
Eisenhower, President 96, 113, 117, 118
Holland, Henry F 120
Key, David McK 125
McDevitt, James A 125
Nu, U 95,96
Simmons, John F 91
Thibodeaux, Ben H 110
Walmsley, Walter N., Jr 104
Weeks, Sinclair 106
Check List of Department of State
Press Releases: July 4-10
Releases may be obtained from the News Division,
Department of State, Washington 25, D. O.
Press releases issued prior to July 4 which ap-
pear in this issue of the Bulletin are Nos. 334 of
June 9, 364 of June 17, 374 of June 21, 377 of June
22, 384 and 385 of June 24, 391 of June 27, 392 of
June 28, 403 of June 29, 404, 406, and 409 of June 30,
410, 411, and 413 of July 1.
No. Date Subject
*418 7/6 Agricultural representative to U.S.S.R.
f419 7/7 War damage agreement with Luxem-
bourg.
*420 7/7 Parkman resignation.
421 7/7 Note to U.S.S.R. on Bering Sea plane
incident.
t422 7/7 Air transport agreement with Germany.
f423 7/7 Hoover : statement at signing of air
transport agreement with Germany.
424 7/9 Deposit of U.S. ratification of Austrian
treaty.
425 7/9 Renegotiation of tariff concessions with
Finland.
* Not printed.
t Held for a later issue of the Bulletin.
United States
Government Printing Office
DIVISION OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS
Washington 25, D. C.
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE TO AVOID
PAYMENT OF POSTAGE, $300
(GPO)
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
the
Department
of
State
The United States and Germany: 1945-1955
Order Form
Fo: Supt. of Documents
Govt. Printing Office
Washington 25, D.C.
Enclosed And:
(cash, check, or
money order).
Publication 5827
25 cents
The story of the shaping of American policy toward Germany
during the 10 years which culminated in Germany's return to
the community of free nations is told officially for the first time
in The United States and Germany: 1945-1955, a 56-page illus-
trated pamphlet.
Ways and means of attaining U.S. goals in Germany have
changed since 1945, the booklet notes, "but so have we changed,
and so has Germany, and so has the world." To appreciate the
significance of this change, it continues, "it is necessary to look
back to the beginning of the postwar decade and note the factors
that have influenced our course."
Much of the story is appropriately concerned with the im-
portant developments of 1954-55. Of these the document
says: "The events of the past year more than any other have
tested the validity of our policy. In spite of obstacles and re-
verses, our policy for Germany has achieved in a decade what
we once believed would require a full generation. A new
Germany, risen from the ruins of Nazi Germany, has reached
the status of well-earned sovereignty and acceptance as an equal
into the partnership of free nations."
Copies of The United States and Germany: 19U5-1955 may be
purchased for 25 cents from the Superintendent of Documents,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C.
Please send me copies of The United States and Germany: 1945-
1955.
Name:
Street Address:
City, Zone, and State:
*s/t<>' ^/)e/ictw6m&n6 /0& t/tcde<
•I. XXA7/J, No. 839
TO SEEK THE ROAD TO PEACE • Address by the
President 131
THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AMERICAN
REPUBLICS IN WORLD AFFAIRS • by Assistant
Secretary Holland 135
MUTUAL DEFENSE ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT
WITH GERMANY
Department Announcement 142
Text of Agreement 142
AIR TRANSPORT AGREEMENT WITH GERMANY
Department Announcement 145
Text of Agreement 146
Excliange of Notes on Route Scltedulc 149
PROGRESS IN THE TRUST TERRITORY OF THE
PACIFIC ISLANDS • Statements by Delmas H. Nucher 153
For index see inside back cover
Superintendent of Documents
AUG 2 6 1955
'•*t«» e*
«ub Zii lybb i ll
zJne z/)efvaw6me'rit c& t/late Y^J kA. A. J. \D L J. JL JL
Vol. XXXIII, No. 839 • Publication 5929
July 25, 1955
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents
0.8. Government Printing Office
Washington 25, D.C.
Prick:
52 issues, domestic $7.60, foreign $10.26
Single copy, 20 cents
The printing of this publication has been
approved by the Director of the Bureau of
the Budget (January 19, 1955).
Note: Contents of this publication are not
copyrighted and items contained herein may
be reprinted. Citation of the Department
of State Bulletin as the source will be
appreciated.
The Department of State BULLETIN,
a weekly publication issued by the
Public Services Division, provides the
public and interested agencies of
the Government with information on
developments in the field of foreign
relations and on the work of t/i«
Department of State and the Foreign
Service. The BULLETIN includes se-
lected press releases on foreign policy,
issued by the White House and the
Department, and statements and ad-
dresses made by the President and by
the Secretary of State and other offi-
cers of the Department, as well as
special articles on various phases of
international affairs and the func-
tions of the Department. Informa-
tion is included concerning treaties
and international agreements to
which the United States is or nuiy
become a party and treaties of gen-
eral international interest.
Publications of the Department, as
well as legislative material in the field
of international relations, are listed
currently.
To Seek the Road to Peace
Address by the President '
Within a matter of minutes I shall leave the
United States on a trip that in some respects is
unprecedented for a President of the United
States. Other Presidents have left the continental
limits of our country for the purpose of discharg-
ing their duties as Commander in Chief in time of
war, or to participate in conferences at the end of
the war and to provide for the measures that would
bring about a peace.
But now, for the first time, a President goes to
engage in a conference with heads of other govern-
ments in order to prevent war — in order to see
whether, in this time of stress and strain, we can-
not devise measures that will keep from us this
terrible scourge that afflicts mankind.
Now, manifestly, there are many difficulties in
the way of a President going abroad for a period,
particularly while Congress is in session. He has
many constitutional duties. He must be here to
perform them. I am able to go on this trip only
because of the generous cooperation of the political
leaders in Congress of both parties who have ar-
ranged their work so that my absence for a period
will not interfere with the business of the
Government.
On my part I have promised them that by a week
from Sunday, on July 24th, I shall be back here
ready to carry on my accustomed duties.
Establishing a New Spirit
Now, it is manifest that in a period such as this,
the time I am able to spend abroad, we cannot set-
tle the details of the many problems that afflict the
world. But, of course, I go for a very serious pur-
pose. This purpose is to attempt, with my col-
leagues, to change the spirit that has characterized
1 Delivered to the Nation over radio and television on
July 15 before his departure for the Heads of Government
meeting opening at Geneva, Switzerland, on July 18.
the intergovernmental relationships of the world
during the past 10 years.
Now, let us think for a moment about this pur-
pose. Let us just enumerate a few of the problems
that plague the world — the problem of armaments
and the burdens that people are forced to carry
because of the necessity for these armaments; the
problem of the captive states, once proud people,
that are not allowed their own form of govern-
ment freely chosen by themselves and under indi-
viduals freely elected by themselves; the problem
of divided countries, people who are related to each
other by blood kinship and divided by force of
arms into two camps that are indeed expected to be
hostile to each other. Then we have the problem
of international interference in the internal af-
fairs of free governments, bringing about a situa-
tion that leads to subversion, difficulties, and re-
criminations within a country — sometimes even
revolution.
These problems are made all the more serious
by complications between governments. These
problems of which I speak have often arisen as
the aftermath of wars and conflicts. But govern-
ments are divided also by differing ambitions, by
differing ideologies, by mutual distrust and the
alarms that these create, and because of the alarms,
they build up armaments and place their trust for
peace and protection in those armaments, and
these armaments create greater alarm, and so we
have a spiral of growing uneasiness, suspicion,
and distrust.
That is the kind of thing that the world faces
today.
No Easy Settlement
Now for these things there is no easy settlement.
In the brief time that this conference can exist, it
is impossible to pursue all of the long and tedious
July 25, 7955
131
Paris and Geneva Meetings
Statement by Secretary Dulles 1
I am leaving in advance of President Eisenhower
in order to help prepare for the Geneva meeting.
Tomorrow and Friday I shall be conferring with the
French and British Foreign Ministers in Paris and
hearing the report of our preparatory group which
has been working in Paris for the past week. Then
on Saturday I shall attend a meeting of the Council
of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Most,
if not all, of the Foreign Ministers of the 15 member
nations will be present. That Organization is much
interested in some of the problems which may come
up at Geneva, particularly in relation to the Federal
Republic of Germany, which is now a member of
Nato. Then on Saturday evening I shall fly to
Geneva to meet President Eisenhower on his arrival
and to acquaint him with the results of our Paris
talks.
There is every reason to believe that the three
Western powers see eye to eye with reference to
the matters which are likely to come up at Geneva.
This initial unity is a good beginning of our efforts
to reach agreement with the Soviet Union on the
stated purposes of the Geneva conference, namely
to identify the issues to be worked on in the future
and to agree on the international procedures to be
established for finding solutions.
The Geneva conference will be a beginning and
not an end. It is not to be expected that great de-
cisions of substance will be made there. What is
to be hoped is that the Geneva conference will im-
plement our unceasing quest for a secure and just
peace and breathe a new spirit into the future
efforts needed to achieve that result.
1 Made on the occasion of the Secretary's depar-
ture for Paris and Geneva on July 13 (press release
430).
negotiations that must take place before the details
of these problems can be settled.
Our many postwar conferences have been char-
acterized too much by attention to details — by an
effort apparently to work on specific problems
rather than to establish the spirit and the attitude
in which we shall approach them. Success, there-
fore, has been meager. Too often, indeed, these
conferences have been mere opportunities for ex-
ploitation of nationalistic ambitions, or indeed
only for sounding boards for the propaganda that
the participants want to spread to the world.
If we look at this record, we would say, "Why
another conference ? What hope is there for suc-
cess?" Well now, the first question I ask you —
"Do we want to do nothing? Do we want to sit
and drift along to the inevitable end in such a
contest of war or increased tensions?" We want
peace. We cannot look at this whole situation
without realizing first that pessimism never won
any battle, whether it was in peace or it was in
war.
Next we will understand that one ingredient has
been missing from all these conferences — an honest
intent to conciliate, to understand, to be tolerant,
to try to see the other fellow's viewpoint as well
as we see our own. I say to you, if we can change
the spirit in which these conferences are con-
ducted, we will have taken the greatest step toward
peace, toward future prosperity and tranquillity
that has ever been taken in all the history of
mankind.
I want to give you a few reasons for hope in
this project.
The People Want Peace
First, the people of all the world desire peace.
This is peace for people everywhere. I distinguish
between people and governments here for the
moment when we know that the great hordes of
men and women who make up the world do not
want to go to the battlefield. They want to live
in peace — not a peace that is a mere stilling of
the guns but a peace in which they can live hap-
pily, tranquilly, and in confidence that they can
raise their children in a world of which they will
be proud. That common desire for peace is some-
thing that is a terrific force in this world and to
which I believe all political leaders in the world
are beginning to respond. They must recognize it.
Another item — Did you note this morning the
speech made by Premier Bulganin in Moscow?
Every word he said was along the line that I am
now speaking. He talked of conciliation and tol-
erance and understanding. I say to you — I say
to all the world — if the words that he expressed are
as truly reflective of the hearts and minds of the
men in the Kremlin as we are sure they are reflec-
tive of the hearts and minds of all the people in
Russia, as in the hearts and minds of all the people
in the world everywhere, then there will be no
trouble between the Eussian delegation and our
own at this coming conference.
Now I want to mention another item that is
important in this problem. The free world is
132
Department of Sfofe Bulletin
divided from the Communist world by an Iron
Curtain. The free world has one great factor
in common. We are not held together by force,
but we are held together by this great factor,
and it is this : The free world believes, under one
religion or another, in a Divine Power. It be-
lieves in a Supreme Being. Now this, my friends,
is a very great factor for conciliation and peace at
this time because each of those religions — each
one of them — has as one of its basic command-
ments the words — -the terminology — that is simi-
lar to our Golden Rule. "Do unto others as you
would have them do unto you." This means that
the thinking of those people is based upon ideas
of right and justice and mutual self-respect, con-
sideration for the other man. And this means
peace, because only in peace can such conceptions
as these prevail. This means that the free people
of the world hate war, and they want peace and
are fully dedicated to it.
Now this country, as other free countries, main-
tains arms. We maintain formations of war and
all the modern weapons. Why? Because we
must. As long as this spirit that has prevailed
up to now is going to prevail in the world, we can-
not expose our rights, our privileges, our homes,
our wives, our children, to the risk that would
come to an unarmed country. But we want to
make it perfectly clear these armaments do not
reflect the way we want to live; they merely re-
flect the way under present conditions we have to
live.
Power of Prayer
Now, it is natural for a people, steeped in a re-
ligious civilization, when they come to moments
of great importance — maybe even crisis — such as
now we face, to turn to the Divine Power that
each has in his own heart, believes in his own heart,
for guidance, for wisdom, for some help in doing
the thing that is honorable and is right. I have
no doubt that tonight, throughout this country
and, indeed, throughout the free world, such
prayers are ascending. This is a mighty force.
And this brings to me the thought that through
prayer we could also achieve a very definite and
practical result at this very moment. Suppose,
on the next Sabbath Day observed by each of our
religions, America, 165 million people of us, went
to our accustomed places of worship and, crowd-
ing those places, asked for help and, by so doing,
demonstrated to all the world the sincerity and
depth of our aspirations for peace.
This would be a mighty force.
None could then say that we preserve armaments
because we want to — we preserve them because
we must.
My friend, Secretary Dulles, and I go to this
conference in the earnest hope that we may ac-
curately represent your convictions, your beliefs,
your aspirations. We shall be conciliatory be-
cause our country seeks no conquest, no property
of others. We shall be tolerant, because this Na-
tion does not seek to impose our way of life upon
others. We shall be firm in the consciousness of
your spiritual and material strength and your de-
fense of the right.
But we shall extend the hand of friendship to
all who will grasp it honestly and concede to us
the same rights, the same understanding, the same
freedom, that we accord to them.
We — the Secretary and I — shall do our best with
others there to start the world on the beginning
of a new road, a road that may be long and diffi-
cult but which, if faithfully followed, will lead us
all into a better and fuller life.
John Marshall Bicentennial Month
Proclamation 3102 >
Whereas John Marshall, soldier, diplomat, leg-
islator, and fourth Chief Justice of the United
States, played a vital role in the strengthening of
our constitutional form of government; and
Whereas his long and distinguished term of
office as Chief Justice, from 1801 to 1835, was
marked by precedent-setting decisions which have
been important factors in developing and main-
taining the historic liberties of the people of the
United States ; and
Whereas a wider public knowledge and appre-
ciation of the work and achievements of the great
Chief Justice are desirable today in order to
strengthen the moral, social, and political struc-
ture of our Nation, and to help in the preservation
and protection of the lives, liberties, and property
of all our people; and
Whereas September 24, 1955, is the two hun-
1 20 Fed,. Reg. 5089.
July 25, 1955
133
dredth anniversary of the birth of John Marshall,
and the Congress, by joint resolution approved on
August 13, 1954 (68 Stat. 702), has designated
the month of September 1955 as John Marshall
Bicentennial Month and has requested the Presi-
dent to issue a proclamation calling upon the
people of the United States to observe that month
by paying tribute to the achievements and memory
of John Marshall :
NOW, THEREFORE, I, DwiGHT D. EISENHOWER,
President of the United States of America, do
hereby call upon all interested agencies and
organizations throughout the Nation to observe
the month of September 1955 as John Marshall
Bicentennial Month with appropriate activities
and ceremonies commemorative of the inspiring
role of John Marshall in our national life, and I
urge the people of the United States to take part
in such activities and ceremonies.
I also urge the people of the United States to
read the Constitution, and to study its history and
its interpretations, for a better understanding and
appreciation of our country and of John Marshall.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my
hand and caused the Seal of the United States of
America to be affixed.
Done at the City of Washington this thirteenth
day of July in the year of our Lord
[seal] nineteen hundred and fifty-five, and of
the Independence of the United States
of America the one hundred and eightieth.
By the President :
John Foster Dulles
Secretary of State
Fifth National UNESCO Conference
To Meet at Cincinnati
Press release 427 dated July 11
The United States National Commission for
Unesco (United Nations Educational, Scientific
and Cultural Organization) will sponsor a na-
tional conference at Cincinnati, Ohio, on Novem-
ber 3, 4, and 5, Commission Chairman Milton G.
Baker announced on July 11. The conference
theme is: "Unesco: The First Ten Years — An
American Appraisal and Forecast." It is the fifth
conference convened by the National Commission
under its legislative mandate to call "general con-
ferences for the discussion of matters relating to
the activities of the Organization." Previous
meetings were held at Philadelphia, Cleveland,
New York, and Minneapolis at 2-year intervals
beginning in 1947.
The conference program committee, headed by
Raymond McCoy of Xavier University, Cincin-
nati, Ohio, has scheduled 3 general conference
sessions to be addressed by nationally known
speakers and 21 discussion groups which will ap-
praise various phases of the Unesco programs and
activities. These group meetings will be under
the direction of appropriate national organiza-
tions including the American Council on Educa-
tion, the National Planning Association, the Na-
tional Academy of Science-National Research
Council, and the National Education Association.
Also included are the Social Science Research
Council, the American National Theatre and
Academy, and a number of others.
More than 500 institutions of higher learning
and national organizations concerned with inter-
national cooperation in education, science, and
culture will be invited to send representatives.
About a thousand persons are expected to attend.
Lucien Wulsin, Sr., president of the Baldwin
Piano Company, heads the Cincinnati sponsoring
committee.
A 2-day meeting of the U.S. National Commis-
sion will precede the conference.
Pravda Correspondent Permitted
To Attend Shakespeare Festival
Press release 428 dated July 11
Follotving is the text of a note delivered to the
Soviet Embassy on July 11 regarding the visit of
a Pravda correspondent to Stratford, Conn. :
The Secretary of State presents his compliments
to the Charge dAffaires ad interim of the Union
of Soviet Socialist Republics and referring to the
Embassy's note of July 9, 1955 1 and to the De-
partment's note of January 3, 1955 2 grants per-
mission for "Pravda" correspondent Evgeni V.
Litoshko and Madame Litoshko to travel by rail
1 Not printed.
2 Bulletin of Jan. 31, 1955, p. 193.
134
Department of State Bulletin
from New York, New York to Stratford, Connec-
ticut on July 12, 1955, returning several days later
by the same means.
This permission has been granted in order to
facilitate Mr. Litoshko's acceptance of the invita-
tion tendered him by the Bridgeport Herald of
Bridgeport, Connecticut to attend a Shakespear-
ean Festival sponsored by that newspaper. It is
to be hoped that the Soviet Government will ap-
ply its regulations restricting travel by foreign
citizens in the Soviet Union with equal liberality
should an American press representative wish to
visit an area of the Soviet Union normally closed
to such travel.
The Responsibility of the American Republics in World Affairs
by Henry F. Holland
Assistant Secretary for Inter- American Affairs x
We live in an age in which man has the power
to blast himself from the earth. The very sur-
vival of humanity depends upon our ability to de-
vise a structure of international relations within
which widely divergent nations can live at peace
with sufficient mutual respect and understanding
to insure the peaceful settlement of disputes aris-
ing between them.
Perhaps it is unfortunate that man's capacity
to destroy himself as a species should have been
achieved at a time when the nations of the world
still diifer so widely as regards size and popula-
tion, as well as their degree of industrial, political,
military, and cultural development. These wide
differences between us complicate our efforts to
devise a workable international system adequate
to maintain peace. On the other hand, this same
awesome capacity for self-destruction may prove
to be the catalyst without which such a system
could never be developed.
The United Nations Organization has proved
invaluable as a device for focusing the influence
of world opinion on the peaceful solution of inter-
national problems, as a testing ground where the
real facts regarding these problems can be estab-
lished through debate and impartial investigation,
as a forum in which large and small nations can
speak with more nearly equal voices than when
engaged in bilateral negotiation. The United
Nations and its subsidiary organizations mark
the closest approach yet achieved by man to that
1 Address made at the Conference on American Foreign
Policy of Colgate University at Hamilton, N.Y., on July 11.
worldwide law and order which is today so clearly
essential to our survival.
Much has been said of the world leadership
which history has in our times imposed upon the
United States. But there is another need whose
urgency increases — that for a community of
leaders. The free nations of the world are strug-
gling to establish a workable international system
which will maintain peace. The frustrations and
obstacles we encounter are discouraging. If
somewhere in the world a group of nations can
give a continuing, successful demonstration of
such a system actually working on a regional basis,
the inspiration to the remainder of the world will
be great. What any substantial group of nations
actually achieves can eventually and surely be
achieved by a worldwide community of nations
if they so will.
We know that a peace sustained by force is not
lasting. There can be no lasting peace until all
nations voluntarily identify themselves with an
international structure erected upon principles
guaranteeing the independence, security, and in-
tegrity of the individual members. Such an in-
ternational organization, once established, will not
survive unless men are convinced that it will
eventually be successful in meeting and solving
the problems arising among its members. Should
the United Nations fail, man's disillusionment
may well be such that years could pass before des-
peration again drove him to undertake another
worldwide organization for the peaceful solution
of disputes between nations.
July 25. 1955
135
Evolution of a World Organization
From our experience in the United Nations we
know now that an international structure embrac-
ing the whole world and functioning effectively
can be achieved only by years of trial and error,
by a process of evolution. The United Nations
as it exists today, with all of its virtues and its
defects, must be conceded to mark no more than
a transitional stage in a process of evolution which
must extend for we know not how many more years
before a satisfactory result is achieved. Peace
today is uneasily preserved by the harsh certainty
that the combined military power of free nations
is adequate to crush any combination of forces
that Soviet Russia might lead or inspire. Such
a peace falls far short of our aspirations. Yet
such a peace preserved by the growing military
strength of the free nations of the world does af-
ford us time in which to perfect the essential
framework of a successful worldwide system.
Ten years of work in the United Nations have
put behind us a part of the tortuous and often
discouraging road which we must travel if men are
to reach that goal which lies somewhere in the
future. The fact that thorny and stubborn prob-
lems have been solved in the United Nations gives
us courage to attack those which, like the heads of
the dragon, seem to replace each that is removed.
So, too, does the somber conviction that the alter-
native to such efforts may be the frightful one of
nuclear warfare.
These limited achievements, these frightful al-
ternatives will suffice, I believe, to keep the free
world constant in its course despite the strain
and cost. But how much more willing would be
our own effort and that of others, with what rising
enthusiasm would the free world press forward
if our ultimate goal could seem but nearer at hand !
Mankind needs urgently a demonstration that the
goal we have set for ourselves can in fact be
achieved.
Nations at times become disheartened by the
number and complexity of the problems, domestic
and international, which obstruct their progress
to a more abundant and dignified life. They need
the incentive that can best derive from a living
example of the rewards which can be achieved
through the essentially spiritual and religious
philosophy of the free world. These are rewards
assured not only to powerful nations but to all
nations, great and small, that identify themselves
with an international order based upon these
principles.
The Example of the American Republics
If our present evolutionary process is not to
stagnate, if it is to avoid retrogressive phases, it
becomes imperative that there emerge today a
group of nations which all men can recognize as
an example of that larger global community which
must be our ultimate goal. That group of nations
does exist in the 21 American Republics. Their
association for military, political, cultural, and
economic collaboration is the most successful and
advanced yet achieved by man.
Not until some such relationship as that which
for a century has been evolving in this hemisphere
is extended to embrace all nations can we hope for
more than a passing "peace in our time."
The success of the American Republics in the
conduct of our international relations is of vital
importance to all Americans. But today I want
to talk of its importance to the rest of the world.
It may well determine the direction in which world
history will move in the years ahead. Why should
such decisive influence with its correlative respon-
sibility be vested in the 21 American Republics?
Until recent decades no American State identified
itself intimately with the trend of world events.
The answer is that our relations with each other
over the past century have been in a sense a pilot
plant. Its successful operation through the
stresses and shocks of international relations has
offered a real incentive to the world at large to
entrust its hopes to the United Nations. The vis-
ible, measurable success of the inter-American
system, which included more than a third of the
founders of the United Nations, gave that pro-
jected organization a basis in demonstrated ex-
perience rather than theory. The knowledge that
21 of the 51 nations assembled at San Francisco
had made such an international system succeed,
and had done so under conditions of adversity not
unlike those existing elsewhere in the world, must
have afforded a powerful incentive.
A century ago we undertook in this hemisphere
to demonstrate that widely dissimilar states can
devise a way of life which gradually eliminates
harmful or unnecessary differences between them,
while preserving and even perfecting those differ-
ences held sacred by their various peoples. Many
of the problems which today imperil the success of
136
Department of State Bulletin
the United Nations likewise, to a greater or lesser
degree, obstructed our path at that time.
Here, as in the United Nations now, were coun-
tries ranging from the earth's smallest to its larg-
est ; states peopled by men of different race, culture,
language, religion, and history. There were states
separated by what traditionally would have repre-
sented a century of progress along the road of eco-
nomic development and industrialization. There
were nations whose relations were constantly trou-
bled by the strain of old, unsettled disputes ; people
separated from each other by distances almost as
great as those from pole to pole, by some of the
world's highest mountain barriers, or by vast ex-
panses of untraversable wilderness.
Any system of international relationships which
could weld 21 such states into a tightly knit group
which proudly refers to itself as a "family" must
offer great hope to a troubled world which desper-
ately seeks some device to preserve peace without
sacrifice of freedom, honor, or national sover-
eignty, some means of averting a third world war
from which civilization could not hope to recover.
The American Republics are a living example
of the fruits of an international system designed to
insure the peaceful settlement of disputes, to in-
sure to each state an opportunity to achieve its eco-
nomic, cultural, and political aspirations with the
active assistance of other members of the com-
munity.
Regional Organizations
In 1945 when the United Nations Organization
was established, the inter- American system had
not yet reached its present state of development.
Even so, its demonstrated success exerted an influ-
ence so powerful that many of the principles upon
which it was founded were carried forward as key-
stones of the larger structure. Ten years ago in
San Francisco the representatives of the American
States were so convinced of the crucial importance
of regional structures such as theirs that they
joined in a gallant and successful fight to overturn
the principle of universalism accepted at Dumbar-
ton Oaks and to establish the concept of regional
organizations within the United Nations. That
concept is now embodied in such mutual security
organizations throughout the world as the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization and the Southeast
Asia Treaty Organization. Without them the
postwar threat of Communist subversion and im-
perialism might not have been met and checked.
Many of us feel deeply that for civilization to
survive, to avert a spiritual and moral retreat that
would sacrifice centuries of progress, the world as
a whole must proceed along some such path of de-
velopment as that down which we in this hemi-
sphere have toiled for more than a century. Man-
kind may be willing to do that so long as, and only
so long as, we in our lives as nations demonstrate
that this road does in fact lead to the fulfillment
of man's ancient yearning for peace with freedom
and dignity. If we succeed in our own quest, then
others will surely follow us. If each new decade
reaffirms that in the Americas it is law and not
force or threat of force which sustains the sov-
ereignty and integrity of nations, then, though
elsewhere international despotisms may arise, they
will not endure. These principles which here have
proved effective to guarantee to the smallest and
weakest state that same degree of national dignity
and sovereignty which is the most cherished
achievement of the strongest will surely spread to
the rest of this world.
What is the genius of our relationship in this
hemisphere? First, perhaps, it is the knowledge
that neither as individual states nor as a commu-
nity have we yet achieved a level of progress which
is acceptable to us as free and religious men. Yet,
singly and collectively, the material and spiritual
growth we can record at each successive inter-
American conference makes us content to press
forward confidently toward the next.
The Spiritual Bond
It i9 the essentially spiritual stuff of which our
bond is made which has given it the strength to
preserve its intended design despite the shocks
of global wars and the constant erosion of those
lesser disagreements which must occasionally arise
among so large a group of vigorous and pro-
gressive nations.
Our relationship contemplates that all will, if
necessary, by force of arms protect whichever
may find itself attacked. Yet it is not primarily
a military alliance. By treaties, resolutions, and
international contracts we are committed to the
principle that the economic development of each
benefits the entire community. Yet we are far
more than a trading or economic community.
Our procedures for the peaceful settlement of dis-
putes arising between us are among the finest
July 25, 1955
137
achievements of our relationship. Yet the deter-
mination which more than all of these unites us
and gives meaning and direction to our bond goes
far beyond these which I have mentioned. It is
to establish and constantly to strengthen through-
out this new world and its 350 million peoples
those principles of the sanctity of the individual
and his freedom, of the brotherhood of man, which
are common to all the different faiths that we pro-
fess. On many things our views may differ. Our
right to hold such differences is one of those which
we most cherish. But on these basic tenets of our
American creed we are solidly united.
There are, I believe, other convictions shared by
all of us and which should be mentioned here.
They and others of like nature are preserved in
our inter- American treaties and resolutions.
Nonintervention in Domestic Affairs
As a man has the right to pursue the fulfillment
of his aspirations without unlawful interference
from his fellows, we are as states each irrevocably
committed to the principle of nonintervention in
the domestic affairs of every other. As the most
powerful member of the community we are prone
to think that the principle of nonintervention is
one which restrains the United States for the bene-
fit of the other American Republics. On the con-
trary, there is not a one of us but has felt both
the benefits and the obligations of this principle.
Each of our governments is from time to time
subjected to strong pressure from its own domestic
groups to criticize or meddle in the domestic
activities of some other American State. Were
we to be swayed by these pressures, I doubt that
our inter-American system could long endure.
It was not until the doctrine of nonintervention
was firmly established that the system achieved
real grandeur.
An important companion to the principle of
nonintervention is our conviction that the well-
being of every American State is basically im-
portant to that of every other. The misfortunes
of each member of this community vitally concern
every other. In the military field this has led us
to adopt the principle set out in article 3 of the
Rio Treaty of 1947, which provides that "an armed
attack by any State against an American State
shall be considered as an attack against all the
American States." That article served as the in-
spiration for article 5 of the North Atlantic
138
Treaty of 1949, which provides that "an armed
attack against one or more of them [the sub-
scribers to the treaty] in Europe or North Amer-
ica shall be considered an attack against them all."
This interpretation of an attack on one as an
attack on all marks a milestone in our defensive
security arrangements.
In the political field, our universal concern with
the well-being of every member state inspired the
Caracas Resolution, 2 which declares that domina-
tion by international communism of the political
institutions of any of our states imperils the peace
of America. In the economic field, it leads each
of U9 in its own realistic self-interest to seek means
effectively to contribute to the well-being of every
other.
Our belief in the sovereign equality of the
American States recognizes the obvious fact that
the dimensions of our statesmen are not deter-
mined by those of the sovereign territories they
represent. In this hemisphere we deal as equals,
as adult and mature states. We have no caste
system. In our councils, from the smallest of us
to the largest, we debate with the vigor and con-
viction of equals. And well we might, for all have
contributed, and importantly, in forging the struc-
ture within which we reside. We are, I believe,
all proud that the inter- American system as it
exists today was neither an Anglo-Saxon nor a
Latin vision. It is, instead, a marvelous composite
which might never have existed had it not drawn
upon the finest concepts of these two cultures.
Lastly, in referring to the basic convictions
underlying our inter- American system, one is im-
pressed by the profound assurance in the minds
of Americans everywhere that we are in fact on
the right road. Our inter-American system
affords all the assurance that any nation needs
that industry, resourcefulness, and self -discipline
mean sure and steady progress toward the fulfill-
ment of its just aspirations.
Successes of the Inter-American System
This kind of confidence can only come from
success. What are our successes which would
justify such a conviction?
In the political field our experience during the
past years justifies our belief that the Organiza-
tion of American States is capable of dealing with
2 Bulletin of Mar. 22, 1954, p. 420.
Department of State Bulletin
any inter-American problem brought before it.
It is no reflection upon the liberation movement
which so gallantly overcame the Communist-
dominated regime in Guatemala to recall that for
weeks earlier the Organization of American States
had been readying an extraordinary meeting of
Foreign Ministers to decide upon the measures
which might be required to eliminate this threat
to the peace of the Americas.
Earlier in this year that same organization,
determined that its actions would be worthy of
the trust reposed in it to preserve our peace, under-
took in the Costa Rican outbreak a whole series of
unprecedented measures. It established an inter-
national aerial patrol, coordinating aircraft sup-
plied by several states. 3 When circumstances re-
quired, it affirmatively requested the other Ameri-
can Governments to make war planes avail-
able to the Government of Costa Eica. 4 If, loyal
to our tradition and our trust, we resolve to go
even beyond these unprecedented measures should
the nature of the problem require, then we can
indeed feel that aggression will never prevail in
our hemisphere.
In the economic field our progress is as hearten-
ing as in the political. We hear talk of "under-
developed nations" both in the hemisphere and
out. I have often wondered just what those who
use this phrase mean. If it means a nation whose
progress is unjustly obstructed by its neighbors,
then we can proudly sustain that there are no
underdeveloped countries in this hemisphere.
Here, as I have said, each of us in its own self-
interest seeks to further the economic develop-
ment of every other. Our own contribution to
this joint effort is being made through expanded
opportunities for inter- American trade, through
substantially greater access to sound loans for
developmental purposes, and through intensified
programs of technical assistance. I believe that
these contributions are recognized as constructive
by the other members of this family of nations.
On the other hand, if an "underdeveloped na-
tion" is one which has not yet attained that level
of economic development to which its human and
its natural resources give it the right to aspire,
then we can thank God that we are all under-
developed nations in this hemisphere. The feeling
that in this sense we are underdeveloped is a
' IUd., Jan. 24, 1955, p. 131.
'Ibid., Jan. 31, 1955, p. 182.
wholesome one and furnishes a constant incentive
to make greater use of our resources for the benefit
of our people. It is true that we are experiencing
an era of development which, judged by any stand-
ard, exceeds anything which the world has ever
seen in a comparable area. Nevertheless, there is
not a country in the hemisphere whose resources
are not abundantly adequate to provide substan-
tially higher living standards to its people.
Some of us are passing through temporary
periods of adversity, but there are no cripples
among us. There is not a stagnant economy in
the hemisphere. On all sides there is activity and
progress.
We are certainly not immune to the problems
of inflation and instability of currencies which
have plagued the entire world. In each of our
states continued progress will depend upon the
degree of courage and self-discipline which we
demonstrate in meeting and solving these purely
domestic problems. They are difficult, and their
solution at times raises domestic political obstruc-
tions which may seem insurmountable. Their
solution is complicated by the fact that the very
people who cry out against the suffering which
such problems cause often resist the measures of
self-discipline inevitably required for their solu-
tion.
No Insurmountable Obstacles
Without minimizing the thorniness of our eco-
nomic problems we must never lose sight of the
fact that they are all of a kind that can be solved.
They are often a product of that rapid develop-
ment which will in the end enormously benefit
our peoples. We can take courage from the fact
that there is not one nation in the hemisphere
whose further substantial and lasting progress is
obstructed by really insurmountable obstacles.
Every one of us has progressed enormously in
the last quarter of a century. Yet every one of
us has access to all the elements necessary for
further substantial progress.
I have said that our future here in the United
States and throughout the hemisphere must de-
pend on work, self-discipline, and a willingness
to undertake sacrifices where necessary for the
greater good. These have produced for us the
progress we have achieved. It has abundantly
justified the cost. We would be foolhardy indeed
if we allowed ourselves to be persuaded that like
July 25, 7955
139
progress in the future can be had at any different
price.
What I have said of the responsibility of the
American States to serve as an example and an
inspiration to the world is not new. I recall with
some pride that at the San Francisco meeting
commemorating the tenth anniversary of the
United Nations the 21 American Republics met
separately to exchange views. Also, just last
week President Eisenhower and Secretary Dulles
met with the Ambassadors of the other American
Republics to discuss problems which will be raised
at the forthcoming four-power conference and
solutions which may be advanced for them. Such
meetings evidence the growing conviction of our
Governments and peoples that as partners in this
hemisphere we owe a responsibility not only to
our own people but to the entire world. We must
succeed in our stewardship of our inter- American
affairs, not only because of what it means to this
hemisphere but because of the inspiration which
such an example will afford to the rest of the
world.
Those who attended the San Francisco meeting
were deeply impressed by the speeches of the 37
Foreign Ministers and other heads of delegations
who attended. They demonstrated beyond all
question that national leaders today are keenly
aware that the alternative to some reasonably ef-
fective international system may well be the de-
struction of the human race.
U.S. Position on Proposed
Inter-American Bank
Press release 417 dated July 1
On July 1 the Department of State and the
Treasury Department, in reply to inquiries from
the press, issued the following statement concern-
ing the proposed Inter-American Bank for Eco-
nomic Development.
The proposal for the establishment of an Inter-
American Bank was made by a Committee of Ex-
perts consisting of representatives of nine Latin
American Central Banks and the Secretariat of
the Economic Commission for Latin America.
This Committee was established by a resolution
of the Meeting of Ministers of Finance or Econ-
omy in the Fourth Extraordinary Session of the
Inter-American Economic and Social Council
held at Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in November-
December 1954, to make specific plans for an inter-
American financing institution. 1
The United States Delegation at that Meeting
abstained from voting on the resolution, stating
that the United States had given a great deal of
thought to the problem of Latin American needs
for credit and investment facilities, and had con-
cluded that in its opinion the facilities available
through the International Bank for Reconstruc-
tion and Development, the Export-Import Bank,
the proposed International Finance Corporation,
and private organizations, will be adequate to
meet all demands for sound purposes. It also in-
dicated that if we find at some later date that this
program is not achieving the results which we
believe it can, we shall be glad to discuss other
solutions. The United States Delegation there-
fore expressed its regret that it could not at that
time join in the proposed inter- American regional
financing institution, and indicated it would ab-
stain from participating in drafting specific plans
for it. There have been no developments which
would justify a change in the position expressed
by the United States Delegation at that time.
Change in Termination Date
of U.S.-Ecuadoran Agreement
Press release 402 dated June 28
Steps are being taken to change the termination
date of the 1938 bilateral trade agreement with
Ecuador from July 18, 1955, as had previously
been announced, 2 to January 18, 1956. This does
not constitute a reversal of the decision to end the
trade agreement but is only a postponement.
The postponement was agreed to in order to af-
ford Ecuador an opportunity to deal with eco-
nomic distress in the Ecuadoran hat industry,
especially in the provinces of Azuay and Canar,
which the Ecuadorans believe would be seriously
hurt by earlier termination. Termination of the
1 For an address by Secretary of the Treasury George
M. Humphrey at this meeting, see Bulletin of Dec. 6,
1954, p. 863 ; for a statement by Henry F. Holland, As-
sistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs, on
the U.S. position at this meeting, see ibid., Nov. 8, 1954,
p. 684.
2 Bulletin of Feb. 21, 1955, p. 313.
140
Department of State Bulletin
agreement will have the effect of restoring the
duty on unbleached and undyed hat bodies of
toquilla fiber to 25 percent as provided in the Tariff
Act of 1930, in place of the 12 J /2 percent trade-
agreement rate.
The Ecuadoran hat industry has recently fallen
into a depressed state, resulting in serious eco-
nomic distress in the affected provinces. The
Ecuadorans have plans under way to deal with
the situation in those provinces. The U.S. For-
eign Operations Administration has established a
technical cooperation program in Ecuador to assist
the Ecuadoran Government in its program of eco-
nomic development. Both the Ecuadoran pro-
grams and the Foa assistance will be more effec-
tive, it is believed, if the U.S. tariff on Ecuadoran
hat bodies is maintained at its present level for
an additional 6 months.
Ecuador is not one of the 34 countries in the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Ter-
mination of tins agreement will leave in effect
nine bilateral trade agreements to which the
United States is a party.
Renewal of Educational Exchange
Agreement With France
Press release 415 dated July 1
The United States and France on June 30 re-
newed for a second 5-year period an educational
exchange agreement under the Fulbright Act.
The two Governments, represented respectively by
the American Ambassador to France, C. Douglas
Dillon, and the French Foreign Minister, An-
toine Pinay, exchanged notes in a brief ceremony
at the Quai D'Orsay in Paris.
Under the agreement up to $1 million in Ameri-
can-owned francs will be spent annually for the
next 5 years to finance travel of French citizens
to the United States for study, teaching, lecturing,
or advanced research and to pay travel and main-
tenance costs for Americans to go to France for
similar purposes.
More than 3,000 exchanges have taken place
during the past 5 years under the original
agreement. 1
In presenting the American note proposing ex-
tension of the original agreement, Ambassador
Dillon noted that this act shows more clearly than
words could how fully convinced the United States
is of the value of these educational exchanges, now
proven by experience. He added :
Our two countries have given to their visitors priceless
treasure of experience and understanding. These ex-
changes have contributed and will contribute to deepen
yet further the historic friendship which unites our two
peoples.
He went on to say that to extend the realm of
learning and to share its benefits is a noble task,
and he was convinced that France and the United
States have acted wisely in deciding to continue
the program.
M. Pinay replied that the exchange of these
notes gave him great satisfaction. He said
further :
It is significant that it has been possible to set money
aside out of lend-lease credits to strengthen our cultural
ties, and I must pay homage to the generosity of purposes
which presided over the development of the Fulbright
Agreement. . . . Thanks to the agreement of our two
Governments, hundreds more American and French intel-
lectuals will be able to find the road to scientific
cooperation.
The Foreign Minister concluded his remarks as
follows :
The decision we seal today thus inscribes itself most
auspiciously within the framework of our traditional
friendship, and that is why I have desired to express
to you very simply my satisfaction and my happiness in it.
'For an announcement of the signing of the original
agreement, see Bulletin of Nov. 21, 1948, p. 650.
July 25, 1955
141
Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement With Federal Republic of Germany
DEPARTMENT ANNOUNCEMENT
Press release 408 dated June 30
Negotiations for a mutual defense assistance
agreement under which the United States will
render military assistance to the Federal Republic
of Germany in the creation of her new defense
forces have been concluded and the agreement was
signed at Bonn on June 30.
The agreement follows closely the general pat-
tern of the mutual defense assistance agreements
under which the United States is supplying other
Nato countries with military assistance pursuant
to the Mutual Security Act of 1954. The furnish-
ing and use of such assistance will also accord with
the principles of the United Nations Charter and
the North Atlantic Treaty.
The agreement provides that the United States
will make available equipment, materiel, services,
or other assistance, without specifying the extent
of the aid or the details of the conditions under
which it will be given. It further pledges the two
Governments to take appropriate measures to
keep their publics informed of operations under
the agreement to the fullest extent consistent with
security requirements.
The Federal Republic will use this assistance in
promoting an integrated defense of the North
Atlantic area in accordance with defense plans
formulated by Nato, will join in promoting inter-
national understanding and good will, and will
make the full contribution consistent with its re-
sources to its own defensive strength and the de-
fensive strength of the free world.
Other articles in the agreement cover such mat-
ters as the supply by the Federal Republic of
certain raw and semiprocessed materials required
by the United States, the exchange of patent rights
and technical information, security measures, tax
relief, and conditions under which United States
personnel assigned to implement the agreement
will operate.
The agreement must be ratified by the German
Bundestag before it can enter into force.
TEXT OF AGREEMENT
The United States of America and the Federal Republic
of Germany,
Being parties to the North Atlantic Treaty signed at
Washington on April 4, 1949 ;
Considering their reciprocal pledges under Article 3 of
the North Atlantic Treaty separately and jointly with
the other parties, by means of continuous and effective
self-help and mutual aid, to maintain and develop their
individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack ;
Consciods of the desire to foster international peace
and security through measures which further the ability
of nations dedicated to the purposes and principles of the
Charter of the United Nations to participate effectively in
arrangements for collective self-defense in support of
those purposes and principles, and conscious of the deter-
mination to give their full cooperation to United Nations
collective security arrangements and measures and efforts
to obtain agreement on universal regulation and reduction
of armaments under adequate guarantees against viola-
tion or evasion ;
Considering the support which the Government of the
United States of America has brought to these principles
by enacting the Mutual Security Act of 1954, which au-
thorizes the furnishing of military assistance to certain
nations ;
Desiring to set forth the conditions which wiU govern
the furnishing of such assistance ;
Have agreed as follows :
Article I
1. The Government of the United States of America will
make available to the Government of the Federal Republic
of Germany such equipment, materials, services, or other
assistance as the Government of the United States of
America may authorize and in accordance with such terms
and conditions as may be agreed. Such assistance as may
be made available by the Government of the United States
of America under the agreement will be furnished under
the authority and subject to all of the terms, conditions
and termination provisions of the Mutual Security Act of
1954, acts amendatory and supplementary thereto and
appropriation acts thereunder. The furnishing and use
142
Department of Stale Bulletin
of any such assistance shall be consistent with the prin-
ciples of the Charter of the United Nations and with the
principles of Article 3 of the North Atlantic Treaty.
2. The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany
will make effective use of assistance received under this
agreement for the purpose of promoting an integrated de-
fense of the North Atlantic area in accordance with de-
fense plans formulated by the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization, and will not use such assistance for any
act inconsistent with the strictly defensive character of
the North Atlantic Treaty, or, without the prior consent
of the Government of the United States of America, for
any other purpose. The two Governments will establish
arrangements in which both Governments will participate
to ensure that equipment and materials received under
this agreement, other than equipment or material sold
under Section 106 of the Mutual Security Act of 1954,
and no longer required or used exclusively for the purpose
for which they were furnished or in accordance with the
terms and conditions under which they were furnished
will be offered for return to the Government of the United
States of America for appropriate disposition.
3. In the common security interest of the parties, the
Government of the Federal Republic of Germany will not
transfer to any person not an officer or agent of that
Government, or to any nation other than the United
States of America, title to or possession of any equip-
ment, materials, property, information, or services fur-
nished pursuant to this Agreement without the prior con-
sent of the Government of the United States of America.
4. The Government of the Federal Republic of Ger-
many may use equipment, materials, or services acquired
from the Government of the United States of America on
a reimbursable basis under the agreement (exchange of
notes) of November 23, 1953, 1 for the purpose for which
it will use equipment, materials, or services acquired
under this Agreement.
Article II
1. The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany
will make available to the Government of the United
States of America and to such other governments as the
parties hereto may in each case agree upon, such equip-
ment, materials, services, or other assistance as may be
authorized, in accordance with such terms and conditions
as may be agreed between the two Governments. The
furnishing and use of such assistance shall be consistent
with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations
and with the obligations under Article 3 of the North
Atlantic Treaty.
2. In conformity with the principle of mutual aid, the
Government of the Federal Republic of Germany will
facilitate the production and transfer to the Govern-
ment of the United States of America for such period of
time, in such quantities and upon such terms and condi-
tions as may be agreed, of raw and semi-processed ma-
terials required by the United States of America as a
result of deficiencies or potential deficiencies in its own
resources, and which may be available in the territory of
the Federal Republic of Germany. Arrangements shall
give due regard to the requirements of the Federal Re-
public of Germany for domestic use and commercial
export of such materials.
Article III
The two Governments will, upon the request of either
of them, negotiate appropriate arrangements relating to
the exchange of patent rights and technical information
for defense, in order to expedite such exchanges and at
the same time protect private interests and maintain
necessary security safeguards.
Article IV
1. The Government of the Federal Republic of Ger-
many will take such security measures as may be agreed
between the two Governments in order to prevent the
disclosure or compromise of classified equipment, ma-
terials, services, or information furnished pursuant to
this Agreement.
2. Each Government will, consistent with security re-
quirements, take appropriate measures to keep the public
informed of operations under this Agreement.
Article V
The two Governments will establish procedures whereby
the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany will
so deposit, segregate or assure title to all funds allocated
to or derived from any program of assistance undertaken
by the Government of the United States of America so
that such funds shall not, unless otherwise agreed here-
after, be subject to garnishment, attachment, seizure or
other legal process by any person, firm, agency, corpora-
tion, organization or government.
Article VI
The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany
will grant tax relief to activities of the Government of
the United States of America under this Agreement, or
any similar agreement between the Government of the
United States of America and the government of any
other country receiving military assistance, in accord-
ance with the Agreement between the United States of
America and the Federal Republic of Germany Concern-
ing Tax Relief to be Accorded by the Federal Republic
to United States Expenditures in the Interest of the Com-
mon Defense, signed at Bonn, October 15, 1954. 2
Article VII
The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany
will make available to the Government of the United
States of America German currency for the use of the
Government of the United States of America in adequate
amounts for its administrative and operating expendi-
tures in connection with this agreement. Discussions will
be initiated forthwith with a view to determining the
nature of the expenditures and the amount of such
currency.
1 Treaties and Other International Acts Series 2911.
July 25, 1955
' Not printed.
143
Article VIII
The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany
will receive in its territory personnel of the Government
of the United States of America, including personnel tem-
porarily assigned, who will discharge the responsibilities
of the Government of the United States of America with
respect to the equipment, materials, and services fur-
nished by the latter Government. Such personnel will
operate as part of the Embassy of the United States of
America under the direction and control of the Chief of
the Diplomatic Mission of the United States of America.
These personnel will be accorded authority and facilities
to carry out continuous observation and review of oper-
ations under the program of assistance provided under
this agreement, including the utilization of military as-
sistance furnished by the Government of the United States
of America, and the Government of the Federal Republic
of Germany will provide any information as to these mat-
ters which may be requested by the Government of the
United States of America. The personnel, including de-
pendents, will be divided into two categories :
a) Upon appropriate notification by the Chief of the
Diplomatic Mission of the United States of America, full
diplomatic status will be granted to the senior military
member and the senior Army, Navy and Air Force officer
assigned thereto, and to their respective immediate
deputies.
b) The second category of personnel will enjoy privi-
leges and immunities conferred by international custom,
as recognized by each Government, to certain categories
of personnel of the Embassy of the United States of
America, such as the immunity from civil and criminal
Jurisdiction of the host country, immunity of official
papers from search and seizure, right of free egress,
exemption from custom duties or similar taxes or restric-
tions in respect of personally owned property imported
into the host country by such personnel for their personal
use and consumption, without prejudice to the existing
regulations on foreign exchange, exemption from internal
taxation by the host country upon salaries of such per-
sonnel. Privileges and courtesies incident to diplomatic
status, such as diplomatic automobile license plates, in-
clusion on the "diplomatic list", and social courtesies
may be waived by the Government of the United States
of America for this category of personnel.
It is understood between the two Governments that the
number of personnel in the two categories above will be
kept as low as possible. In the event that the status,
privileges and immunities of such personnel in any other
North Atlantic Treaty country are modified pursuant to
agreement with such other country, the Government of
the United States of America will interpose no objection
to amending this agreement in order that the status,
privileges and immunities provided shall conform to those
in such other North Atlantic Treaty country.
Article EX
The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany
will consistent with its rights and obligations as a mem-
ber of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and under
The Convention on Relations Between the Three Powers
and the Federal Republic of Germany and its Related
Conventions as amended by the Protocol on the Termina-
tion of the Occupation Regime in the Federal Republic
of Germany :
a) join in promoting international understanding and
good will and maintaining world peace ; take such action
as may be mutually agreed upon to eliminate causes of
international tension ; and fulfill the military obliga-
tions which it has assumed under multilateral or bilateral
agreements, treaties or other instruments to which the
United States of America is a party or in which the United
States of America has an interest ;
b) make, consistent with its political and economic
stability and international obligations the full contribu-
tion permitted by its manpower, resources, facilities, and
general economic condition to the development and main-
tenance of its own defensive strength and the defensive
strength of the free world and take all reasonable meas-
ures which may be needed to develop its defense
capacities.
Article X
In order to safeguard the common interests and the
resources of the two Governments, the Government of
the Federal Republic of Germany will cooperate with the
Government of the United States of America in the im-
plementation of security controls agreed or to be agreed
over the export of strategic goods.
Article XI
1. This Agreement shall enter into force upon the
deposit of an instrument of ratification by the Federal
Republic of Germany with the Government of the United
States of America and shall continue in force until one
year after the receipt by either party of written notice
of the intention of the other party to terminate it, except
that the provisions of Article I, paragraphs 2 and 3, and
arrangements entered into under Article I, paragraph 2,
Article III, Article IV, paragraph 1, and Article V, shall
remain in force unless otherwise agreed by the two
Governments.
2. The two Governments shall, upon the request of
either of them, consult regarding any matter relating to
the application or amendment of this Agreement. Such
consultation shall take into account, where appropriate,
agreements concluded by either Government in connection
with the carrying out of Article 9 of the North Atlantic
Treaty.
3. The two Governments will, from time to time, nego-
tiate detailed arrangements necessary to carry out the
provisions of this Agreement.
4. This Agreement shall be registered with the Secre-
tariat of the United Nations.
Done at Bonn, in duplicate in the English and German
languages, both texts authentic, this thirtieth day of June
1955.
For the United States of America
James Bryant Conant
For the Federal Republic of Germany
v. Brentano
144
Department of State Bulletin
Air Transport Agreement With Germany
DEPARTMENT ANNOUNCEMENT
The Department of State and the Civil Aero-
nautics Board announced on July 7 (Department
of State press release 422) that Under Secretary
of State Herbert Hoover, Jr., and German Charge
d'Affaires ad interim Albrecht von Kessel had that
day signed an air transport agreement between
the Federal Republic of Germany and the United
States providing the basic principles to govern air
transport relations between the two countries and
setting forth routes to be operated by their air-
lines.
The agreement contains the fundamental prin-
ciples relating to air transport operations which
have been standard in air transport agreements
negotiated by the United States since the signing
of the air transport agreement between the United
States and the United Kingdom in Bermuda in
February 1946. 1 Approximately 40 agreements
concluded by the United States contain these
principles.
Negotiations leading to the United States-
German agreement were completed on June 10.
Since that time the subject of the agreement has
been discussed by the airlines, the Civil Aeronau-
tics Board, and the Department of State at hear-
ings before the Senate Committee on Interstate
and Foreign Commerce. Later the airlines pre-
sented their views before the Civil Aeronautics
Board. Subsequent to these further discussions
and after careful deliberation, the Civil Aeronau-
tics Board and the Department of State have con-
cluded that, in consideration of all aspects of the
national interest, the agreement as reached by the
representatives of the United States and the Fed-
eral Republic of Germany should be signed
immediately.
In signing the agreement, the United States re-
1 For text of the Bermuda agreement, see Bulletin of
Apr. 7, 1946, p. 586.
Ju/y 25, 7955
351800—55 3
affirms its adherence to the Bermuda principles as
setting forth a sound basis on which to develop
international air transport services. These prin-
ciples, under which airlines of the United States
and of many foreign nations have now had almost
10 years of practical operations, afford ample pro-
tection for local and regional services while per-
mitting a reasonable degree of flexibility to the
operators of trunk-line services.
The routes to be operated by the airlines of the
two countries are as follows :
For airlines of the United States :
1. From the United States of America to Ham-
burg and beyond to points in Europe north and east
of the Federal Republic of Germany.
2. From the United States of America to Dus-
seldorf-Cologne/Bonn, Frankfort, Stuttgart, and
Munich and beyond to points in Europe east and
Air Transport Agreement With Germany
Statement by Under Secretary Hoover 1
Mr. Minister : It gives me great pleasure to be
meeting with you to sign still another agreement
normalizing relations between the Federal Republic
of Germany and the United States.
This agreement will permit the normal operation
of air transport services between our two countries.
While these services have been performed in recent
years by United States and other airlines, this
agreement and the recent inauguration of Lufthansa
service will place our air transport services on a
reciprocal basis.
I hope that the air traffic authorized by this
agreement will prove to be another means of bring-
ing our two nations still closer together.
1 Made on July 7 (press release 423) on the occa-
sion of the signing of the Air Transport Agreement
by Mr. Hoover and German Charge d'Affaires ad
interim Albrecht von Kessel.
145
southeast of the Federal Republic of Germany
and beyond.
3. From the United States of America to Frank-
fort and beyond to points in Europe south and
southeast of the Federal Republic of Germany and
beyond to North Africa, the Near East, and be-
yond.
For airlines of Germany :
1. From the Federal Republic of Germany to
Boston, New York, and Philadelphia and beyond
to points in the Caribbean Sea and beyond to
South America.
2. From the Federal Republic of Germany to
Chicago.
3. From the Federal Republic of Germany to
San Francisco or Los Angeles. (Selection of the
terminal point in the United States of America to
be determined by the Federal Republic of Ger-
many at a later date.)
The airlines of each country also have the right
to make traffic stops at intermediate points between
the two countries. The detailed route descrip-
tions are listed in a note attached to the agreement.
TEXT OF AGREEMENT
The United States of America and the Federal Republic
of Germany,
Desiring to conclude an Agreement for the purpose
of promoting air communications between their respec-
tive territories,
Have accordingly appointed authorized representatives
for this purpose, who have agreed as follows :
ARTICLE 1
For the purposes of the present Agreement :
a) The term "aeronautical authorities" shall mean in
the case of the United States of America, the Civil Aero-
nautics Board and any person or agency authorized to
perform the functions exercised by the Civil Aeronautics
Board and, in the case of the Federal Republic of Ger-
many, the Federal Minister of Transport and any person
or agency authorized to perform the functions exercised
by the said Federal Minister of Transport.
b) The term "territory" in relation to a State shall
mean the land areas and territorial waters adjacent
thereto under the sovereignty, suzerainty, protection,
mandate or trusteeship of that State.
c) The term "designated airline" shall mean an airline
that one contracting party has notified the other contract-
ing party, in writing, to be the airline which will operate
a specific route or routes listed in the exchange of notes
in accordance with paragraph (2) of Article 2 of this
Agreement.
d) The term "air service" shall mean any scheduled air
service performed by aircraft for the public transport of
passengers, mail or cargo.
e) The term "international air service" shall mean an
air service which passes through the air space over the
territory of more than one State.
f ) The term "stop for non-traffic purposes" shall mean
a landing for any purpose other than taking on or dis-
charging passengers, cargo or mail.
ARTICLE 2
(1) Each contracting party grants to the other con-
tracting party rights necessary for the conduct of inter-
national air services by the designated airlines, as follows:
the rights of transit, of stops for non-traffic purposes, and
of commercial entry and departure for international
traffic in passengers, mail and cargo at the points in its
territory named on each of the routes specified in accord-
ance with paragraph (2).
(2) The routes over which the designated airlines of the
two contracting parties will be authorized to operate will
be specified in a Route Schedule, mutually agreed upon,
and set forth in an exchange of diplomatic notes.
ARTICLE 3
Air service on a specified route may be inaugurated by
an airline or airlines of one contracting party at any time
after that contracting party has designated such airline or
airlines for that route and the other contracting party has
given the appropriate operating permission. Such other
party shall, subject to Article 4, be bound to give this per-
mission provided that the designated airline or airlines
may be required to qualify before the competent aeronau-
tical authorities of that party, under the laws and regula-
tions normally applied by these authorities, before being
permitted to engage in the operations contemplated by this
Agreement.
ARTICLE 4
Each contracting party reserves the right to withhold
or revoke the operating permission provided for in Article
3 of this Agreement from an airline designated by the
other contracting party in the event that it is not satisfied
that substantial ownership and effective control of such
airline are vested in nationals of the other contracting
party, or in case of failure by such airline to comply with
the laws and regulations referred to in Article 5 hereof,
or in case of the failure of the airline or the government
designating it otherwise to perform its obligations here-
under, or to fulfill the conditions under which the rights
are granted in accordance with this Agreement.
ARTICLE 5
(1) The laws and regulations of one contracting party
relating to the admission to or departure from its territory
of aircraft engaged in international air navigation, or to
the operation and navigation of such aircraft while within
its territory, shall be applied to the aircraft utilized by the
airline or airlines designated by the other contracting
party, and shall be complied with by such aircraft upon
entering or departing from and while within the territory
of the first contracting party.
146
Department of State Bulletin
(2) The laws and regulations of one contracting party
relating to the admission to or departure from its terri-
tory of passengers, crew, or cargo of aircraft, such as
regulations relating to entry, clearance, immigration,
passports, customs, and quarantine shall be complied with
by or on behalf of such passengers, crew or cargo of the
other contracting party upon entrance into or departure
from, and while within the territory of the first contract-
ing party.
ARTICLE 6
Certificates of airworthiness, certificates of compe-
tency and licenses issued or rendered valid by one con-
tracting party, and still in force, shall be recognized as
valid by the other contracting party for the purpose of
operating the routes and services provided for in this
Agreement, provided that the requirements under which
such certificates or licenses were issued or rendered valid
are equal to or above the minimum standards which may
be established pursuant to the Convention on Inter-
national Civil Aviation. Each contracting party reserves
the right, however, to refuse to recognize, for the purpose
of flight above its own territory, certificates of compe-
tency and licenses granted to its own nationals by another
State.
ARTICLE 7
In order to prevent discriminatory practices and to
assure equality of treatment, both contracting parties
agree that :
a) Each of the contracting parties may impose or
permit to be imposed just and reasonable charges for the
use of public airports and other facilities under its con-
trol. Each of the contracting parties agrees, however,
that these charges shall not be higher than would be
paid for the use of such airports and facilities by its
national aircraft engaged in similar international
services.
b) Fuel, lubricating oils, consumable technical sup-
plies, spare parts, regular equipment, and stores on board
aircraft of the designated airlines of one contracting
party on arrival in the territory of the other contracting
party and retained on board on leaving the territory
of that party shall be exempt, on a basis of reciprocity,
from customs duties, inspection fees and other national
duties or charges. Such supplies may also be used or
consumed free of customs duties and other entrance taxes
aboard aircraft while in flight over the territory of the
other contracting party. With respect to food stores,
however, this shall apply only if the food stores are
issued for immediate consumption aboard aircraft carry-
ing passengers on international air services exclusively
and furthermore if such aircraft can be continuously
supervised by customs authorities in case of intermediate
landings.
c) Fuel, lubricating oils, consumable technical sup-
plies, spare parts, and regular equipment introduced into
the territory of one contracting party by or on behalf of
the other contracting party or its nationals under customs
supervision and control, intended solely for use on, and
used on, aircraft of the designated airlines of such con-
tracting party in international services shall be exempt
on a basis of reciprocity from customs duties, inspection
fees and other national duties or charges.
d) Insofar as the above-mentioned supplies are ex-
empted from duties, fees and charges, they shall not be
subject to the otherwise applicable economic prohibitions
and restrictions relating to import, export and transit.
ARTICLE 8
There shall be a fair and equal opportunity for the
airlines of each contracting party to operate on any
route specified in accordance with paragraph (2) of
Article 2 of this Agreement.
ARTICLE 9
In the operation by the airlines of either contracting
party of the air services over the routes described in
accordance with paragraph (2) of Article 2 of this Agree-
ment, the interest of the airlines of the other contracting
party shall be taken into consideration so as not to affect
unduly the services which the latter provide on all or
part of the same routes.
ARTICLE 10
(1) The air services made available to the public by
the airlines operating under this Agreement shall bear a
close relationship to the requirements of the public for
such services.
(2) It is the understanding of both contracting parties
that services provided by a designated airline under the
present Agreement shall retain as their primary objective
the provision of capacity adequate to the traffic demands
between the country of which such airline is a national
and the countries of ultimate destination of the traffic.
The right to embark or disembark on such services inter-
national traffic destined for or coming from third countries
at a point or points on the routes specified in accordance
with paragraph (2) of Article 2 of this Agreement shall
be applied in accordance with the general principles of
orderly development to which both contracting parties
subscribe and shall be subject to the general principle that
capacity should be related :
a) to traffic requirements between the country of origin
and the countries of ultimate destination of the traffic ;
b) to the requirements of through airline operation;
and,
c) to the traffic requirements of the area through which
the airline passes after taking account of local and re-
gional services.
ARTICLE 11
Rates to be charged on the routes provided for in
accordance with paragraph (2) of Article 2 of this Agree-
ment shall be reasonable, due regard being paid to all
relevant factors, such as cost of operation, reasonable
profit, and the rates charged by any other carriers, as well
as the characteristics of each service, and shall be deter-
mined in accordance with the following paragraphs :
a) The rates to be charged by the airlines of either
contracting party between points in the territory of the
United States and points in the territory of the Federal
July 25, 1955
147
Republic of Germany referred to in the Route Schedule
provided for in paragraph (2) of Article 2 of this Agree-
ment shall, consistent with the provisions of the present
Agreement, he subject to the approval of the aeronautical
authorities of the contracting parties, who shall act in
accordance with their obligations under this Agreement,
within the limits of their legal powers.
b) Any rate proposed by an airline of either contract-
ing party shall be filed with the aeronautical authorities of
both contracting parties at least thirty (30) days before
the proposed date of introduction; provided that this
period of thirty (30) days may be reduced in particular
cases if so agreed by the aeronautical authorities of each
contracting party.
c) During any period for which the Civil Aeronautics
Board of the United States has approved the traffic con-
ference procedures of the International Air Transport
Association (hereinafter called IATA), any rate agree-
ments concluded through these procedures and involving
United States airlines will be subject to approval of the
Board. Rate agreements concluded through this ma-
chinery may also be required to be subject to the approval
of the aeronautical authorities of the Federal Republic
of Germany pursuant to the principles enunciated in
paragraph b) above.
d) The contracting parties agree that the procedure
described in paragraphs e), f) and g) of this Article shall
apply :
aa) If, during the period of the approval by both con-
tracting parties of the IATA traffic conference procedure,
either, any specific rate agreement is not approved with-
in a reasonable time by either contracting party, or, a
conference of IATA is unable to agree on a rate, or
bb) At any time no IATA procedure is applicable, or
cc) If either contracting party at any time withdraws
or fails to renew its approval of that part of the IATA
traffic conference procedure relevant to this Article.
e) In the event that power is conferred by law upon
the aeronautical authorities of the United States to fix
fair and economic rates for the transport of persons and
property by air on international services and to suspend
proposed rates in a manner comparable to that in which
the Civil Aeronautics Board at present is empowered to
act with respect to such rates for the transport of per-
sons and property by air within the United States, each
of the contracting parties shall thereafter exercise its
authority in such manner as to prevent any rate or rates
proposed by one of its airlines for services from the
territory of one contracting party to a point or points in
the territory of the other contracting party from becom-
ing effective, if in the judgment of the aeronautical
authorities of the contracting party whose airline or air-
lines is or are proposing such rate, that rate is unfair or
uneconomic. If one of the contracting parties on receipt
of the notification referred to in paragraph b) above
is dissatisfied with the rate proposed by the airline or
airlines of the other contracting party, it shall so notify
the other contracting party prior to the expiry of the
first fifteen (15) of the thirty (30) days referred to, and
the contracting parties shall endeavor to reach agreement
on the appropriate rate.
aa) In the event that such agreement is reached, each
contracting party will exercise its best efforts to put
such rate into effect as regards its airline or airlines.
bb) If agreement has not been reached at the end of
the thirty (30) day period referred to in paragraph b)
above, the proposed rate may, unless the aeronautical
authorities of the country of the air carrier concerned see
fit to suspend its application, go into effect provisionally
pending the settlement of any dispute in accordance with
the procedure outlined in paragraph g) below.
f ) Prior to the time when such power may be conferred
upon the aeronautical authorities of the United States,
if one of the contracting parties is dissatisfied with any
rate proposed by the airline or airlines of either contract-
ing party for services from the territory of one contract-
ing party to a point or points in the territory of the
other contracting party, it shall so notify the other prior
to the expiry of the first fifteen (15) of the thirty (30)
day period referred to in paragraph b) above, and the
contracting parties shall endeavor to reach agreement on
the appropriate rate.
aa) In the event that such agreement is reached, each
contracting party will use its best efforts to cause such
agreed rate to be put into effect by its airline or airlines.
bb) It is recognized that if no such agreement can
be reached prior to the expiry of such thirty (30) days,
the contracting party raising the objection to the rate
may take such steps as it may consider necessary to
prevent the inauguration or continuation of the service
in question at the rate complained of.
g) When in any case under paragraphs e) or f ) of this
Article the aeronautical authorities of the two contract-
ing parties cannot agree within a reasonable time upon
the appropriate rate after consultation initiated by the
complaint of one contracting party concerning the pro-
posed rate or an existing rate of the airline or airlines
of the other contracting party, upon the request of either,
the terms of Article 13 of this Agreement shall apply.
ARTICLE 12
(1) Consultation between the competent authorities of
both contracting parties may be requested at any time
by either contracting party for the purpose of discussing
the interpretation, application, or amendment of the
Agreement or Route Schedule. Such consultation shall
begin within a period of sixty (60) days from the date
of the receipt of the request by the Department of State
of the United States of America or the Ministry of For-
eign Affairs of the Federal Republic of Germany as the
case may be.
(2) Should agreement be reached on amendment of
this Agreement such amendment shall become effective
when it has been approved in accordance with the pro-
cedure set forth in Article 17 of this Agreement.
(3) Should agreement be reached on amendment of
the Route Schedule, such agreement shall become effec-
tive on the date of an exchange of diplomatic notes in
accordance with the procedure provided in paragraph (2)
of Article 2 for the initial establishment of the Route
Schedule.
148
Department of State Bulletin
(4) A frequent exchange of ideas will take place be-
tween the aeronautical authorities of the two parties in
order to achieve close cooperation in all matters concern-
ing the present Agreement.
ARTICLE 13
(1) Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement,
any dispute between contracting parties relative to the
interpretation or application of this Agreement which can-
not he settled through consultation shall be submitted for
an advisory report to a mixed commission of three mem-
bers, one to be named by each contracting party, and the
third to be agreed upon by the two members so chosen,
provided that such third member shall not be a national
of either contracting party. Each of the contracting
parties shall designate a member within two months of the
date of delivery by either party to the other party of a
diplomatic note requesting settlement of a dispute ; and the
third member shall be agreed upon within one month after
such period of two months.
(2) If either of the contracting parties fails to desig-
nate its own member within two months, or if the third
member is not agreed upon within the time limit indicated,
either party may request the President of the Inter-
national Court of Justice to make the necessary appoint-
ment or appointments by choosing the member or members.
(3) The contracting parties will use their best efforts
under the powers available to them to put into effect the
opinion expressed in any such advisory report. Each con-
tracting party shall bear the expenses arising out of the
activity of its member as well as one half of the expenses
arising out of the activity of the third member.
ARTICLE 14
This Agreement, all amendments thereto, and contracts
connected therewith shall be registered with the Inter-
national Civil Aviation Organization.
ARTICLE 15
If a general multilateral air transport convention ac-
cepted by both contracting parties enters into force, the
provisions of the multilateral convention shall prevail.
Consultations under the provisions of Article 12 may be
held to determine the extent to which the present Agree-
ment is amended, supplemented or revoked by the pro-
visions of the multilateral convention.
ARTICLE 16
Either of the contracting parties may at any time
notify the other of its intention to terminate the present
Agreement. Such a notice shall be sent simultaneously
to the International Civil Aviation Organization. In the
event such communication is made, this Agreement shall
terminate one year after the date of its receipt, unless by
agreement between the contracting parties the notice of
intention to terminate is withdrawn before the expiration
of that time. If the other contracting party fails to
acknowledge receipt, notice shall be deemed as having
been received fourteen (14) days after its receipt by the
International Civil Aviation Organization.
ARTICLE 17
The present Agreement shall enter into force on the date
of receipt by the United States of America of notification
of its approval by the Federal Republic of Germany.
In witness whereof, the undersigned representatives
have signed the present Agreement.
Done at Washington this seventh day of July 1955, in
duplicate in the English and German languages, each of
which shall be of equal authenticity.
FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA :
HeRHERT HOOVER Jr.
FOR THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY:
Kessel
EXCHANGE OF NOTES ON ROUTE SCHEDULE
U.S. Note of July 7
Department of State
Washington
July 7, 1955
Sir: I refer to paragraph 2 of Article 2 of the Air
Transport Agreement between the United States of
America and the Federal Republic of Germany, signed
on July 7, 1955.
In the negotiations which have been conducted in con-
nection with the above-mentioned Agreement, it has been
agreed that air services may be operated in accordance
with the following route schedule.
Route Schedule
A. An airline or airlines designated by the Government
of the United States of America shall be entitled to oper-
ate air services on each of the air routes specified via
intermediate points, in both directions, and to make
scheduled landings in the Federal Republic of Germany
at the points specified in this paragraph :
1. From the United States of America via intermediate
points to Hamburg and beyond to points in Europe north
and east of the Federal Republic of Germany.
2. From the United States of America via intermediate
points to Dusseldorf-Cologne/Bonn, Frankfort, Stutt-
gart and Munich and beyond to points in Europe east
and southeast of the Federal Republic of Germany and
beyond.
3. From the United States of America via intermediate
points to Frankfort and beyond to points in Europe south
and southeast of the Federal Republic of Germany and
beyond to North Africa, the Near East and beyond.
B. An airline or airlines designated by the Govern-
ment of the Federal Republic of Germany shall be en-
titled to operate air services on each of the air routes
specified via intermediate points, in both directions, and
to make scheduled landings in the United States of
America at the points specified in this paragraph :
1. From the Federal Republic of Germany via inter-
mediate points to Boston, New York and Philadelphia
July 25, 1955
149
anfl beyond to points in the Caribbean Sea and beyond to
South America.
2. From the Federal Republic of Germany via inter-
mediate points to Chicago.
3. From the Federal Republic of Germany via inter-
mediate points to San Francisco or Los Angeles.*
^Selection of the terminal point in the United States
of America to be determined by the Federal Republic of
Germany at a later date.
C. Points on any of the specified routes may at the
option of the designated airline be omitted on any or all
flights.
I should be very grateful if you would inform me of
the concurrence of the Government of the Federal Re-
public of Germany in the foregoing route schedule.
Accept, Sir, the renewed assurances of my high consid-
eration.
For the Secretary of State:
Herbert Hoover Jr.
The Honorable
Albrecht von Kessel,
Charge' d'Affnires ad interim of the Federal
Republic of Germany.
German Note of July 7
Embassy of the
Federal Republic of Germany
Washington, D. C.
My dear Mr. Secretary : I have the honor to ac-
knowledge the receipt of your note dated July 7, 1955, re-
ferring to paragraph 2 of Article 2 of the Air Transport
Agreement between the United States of America and
the Federal Republic of Germany, signed on July 7,
1955, and I wish to state that in the negotiations which
have been conducted in connection with said agreement
it has been agreed that air services may be operated in
accordance with the following route schedule:
Route Schedule
A. An airline or airlines designated by the Govern-
ment of the Federal Republic of Germany shall be en-
titled to operate air services on each of the air routes
specified via intermediate points, in both directions, and
to make scheduled landings in the United States of
America at the points specified in this paragraph :
1. From the Federal Republic of Germany via inter-
mediate points to Boston, New York and Philadelphia and
beyond to points in the Caribbean Sea and beyond to
South America.
2. From the Federal Republic of Germany via inter-
mediate points to Chicago.
3. From the Federal Republic of Germany via inter-
mediate points to San Francisco or Los Angeles.*
* Selection of the terminal point in the United States
to be determined by the Federal Republic of Germany at
a later date. (Footnote in original.)
4. Points on any of the specified routes may at the
option of the designated airline be omitted on any or all
flights.
B. An airline or airlines designated by the Government
of the United States of America shall be entitled to
operate air services on each of the air routes specified via
intermediate points, in both directions, and to make
scheduled landings in the Federal Republic of Germany
at the points specified in this paragraph :
1. From the United States via intermediate points to
Hamburg and beyond to points in Europe north and
east of the Federal Republic of Germany.
2. From the United States via intermediate points to
Diisseldorf-Cologne/Bonn, Frankfurt, Stuttgart and
Munich and beyond to points in Europe east and south-
east of the Federal Republic of Germany and beyond.
3. From the United States via intermediate points to
Frankfurt and beyond to points in Europe south and
southeast of the Federal Republic of Germany and be-
yond to North Africa, the Near East and beyond.
Accept, Mr. Secretary, the renewed assurances of my
highest consideration.
Washington, D. C,
the 7th of July 1955.
For the Ambassador
Kessel
Minister
The Honorable
John Foster Dulles
Secretary of State
Department of State
Washington 25, D. C.
Reciprocal War Damage Agreement
With Luxembourg
Press release 419 dated July 7
An agreement signed on June 15, 1955, between
the Government of the United States and the
Grand Duchy of Luxembourg grants reciprocal
national treatment to American nationals who
have, sustained war damage to their private prop-
erty in the territory of Luxembourg and to Lux-
embourg nationals who have sustained war dam-
age to their private property in the territory of
the United States, Hawaii, and Alaska.
American nationals seeking indemnification for
war damage to their private property sustained in
Luxembourg have until January 7, 1956, to address
a brief declaration in the French language to the
Office cle l'Etat des Dommages de Guerre, Luxem
bourg, which office will furnish them the necessary
forms. The duly completed forms, in the French
150
Department of State Bulletin
language, are to be sent by the claimant to the
mayor of the commune in which the war damage
was sustained. After certification, the mayor will
transmit the declaration to the Office de l'Etat des
Dommages de Guerre.
American nationals seeking indemnification
must have possessed either American or Luxem-
bourg nationality on the date of the loss and must
also possess American nationality on the date of
the payment of the compensation.
Luxembourg nationals seeking indemnification
for war damage sustained in the United States,
Hawaii, and Alaska have until January 7, 1956,
to file their statement of claim in the English lan-
guage with the American Legation at Luxembourg
or with the Department of State at Washing-
ton, D.C.
American nationals who have previously de-
clared their war damage to the Luxembourg au-
thorities are not required to make new declarations
unless requested to do so by the Luxembourg au-
thorities. Any declarations made prior to the
coming into force of the agreement on reciprocity
will be regarded as having been filed within the
time allowed by the agreement.
Luxembourg nationals who filed a declaration
of war damage with the American authorities and
whose compensation has not been settled must file a
new declaration in the English language with the
American Legation at Luxembourg or the Depart-
ment of State at Washington, D.C.
Exchange of Agricultural Delegations
With U.S.S.R.
Departure of U.S. Representatives
The Departments of Agriculture and State an-
nounced on July 12 (press release 429) that a
group of 12 American agricultural people were
leaving that day to begin a month's unofficial tour
of Soviet Russia. 1
It is expected that the group will be given a
broad view of Soviet Russia's agricultural econ-
omy and will be invited to see collective farms,
state farms, machine tractor stations, experiment
stations, agricultural colleges, and agricultural
machinery and food-processing plants. The
itinerary indicates that some time will be spent in
the Moscow area, followed by visits to the Ukraine,
one of the rich agricultural areas of Eastern
Europe; the Kuban area of North Caucasus and
the Don and Volga regions; the central Asiatic
part of the U.S.S.R., where irrigated cotton is pro-
duced ; and the new land development in Western
Siberia and Kazakhstan, a pioneering attempt to
open new lands to grain production.
The American group is paying its own expenses.
Members were selected by a nonofficial public com-
mittee 2 and include eight practicing farmers. The
trip is an outgrowth of an editorial suggestion
made earlier this year by the Des Moines Register
and Tribune, Des Moines, Iowa, that U.S.-
U.S.S.R. relations might be improved through ex-
change of agricultural visitors. Also, as a result
of the suggestion, Soviet Russia is sending an of-
ficial agricultural delegation to the United States
during approximately the same period that the
American group will visit there.
W. V. Lambert, dean of the College of Agricul-
ture and director of the Experiment Station and
Extension Service, University of Nebraska, Lin-
coln, Neb., is chairman of the American group.
Other members of the group are Asa V. Clark,
Pullman, Wash. ; Charles J. Hearst, Cedar Falls,
Iowa; John M. Jacobs, Phoenix, Ariz.; David
Gale Johnson, University of Chicago, Chicago,
111.; J. M. Kleiner, Nampa, Idaho; Ralph Ainslee
Olsen, Ellsworth, Iowa; Ferris Owen, Newark,
Ohio; Herbert W. Pike, Whiting, Iowa; W. E.
Reed, North Carolina Agricultural and Technical
College, Greensboro, N. C. ; Lauren K. Soth, Des
Moines, Iowa; and John M. Steddon, Granger,
Iowa. 3
Travel Schedule for Soviet Visitors
Press release 394 dated June 28
Tentative tour plans for a group of leading
agricultural administrative and technical officials
of the Soviet Union who are scheduled to visit the
United States during the approximate period
July 14-August 20, 1955, were announced on June
1 For background, see Bulletin of June 6, 1955, p. 932,
and June 13, 1955, p. 970.
2 See press release 375 of June 21.
3 For additional biographical data on the American
group, see press releases 3S0 of June 22, 3S8 of June 24,
and 418 of July 6.
July 25, 1955
151
28 by the Departments of Agriculture and State. 4
The itinerary has been developed cooperatively
with the land-grant colleges and private industry
and reflects the interests expressed by the Soviet
delegation.
The prospective tour is part of an exchange of
visits. The U. S. S. R. has agreed that a group
of U.S. agricultural representatives may visit the
Soviet Union during the same period. The visits
are the outgrowth of an editorial suggestion orig-
inally made by the Des Moines Register and Trib-
une, Des Moines, Iowa, to the effect that such an
exchange could promote better understanding be-
tween the two nations. Both delegations are pay-
ing their own travel and other costs.
The tentative travel schedule will take in a
broad representative section of the American
economy, both agricultural and industrial. The
tour will give the visitors an opportunity to ob-
serve the high productivity of the American free
enterprise system.
The present schedule calls for the group to ar-
rive at Des Moines, Iowa, on July 15. Several
days will be spent in Iowa, following out a pro-
gram developed under the leadership of Iowa
State College. The central focus will be on the
economic production and marketing of corn and
hogs. It is expected that the visitors will see Iowa
State College; corn-hog, dairy, and diversified
farms; a meat packing plant and a milk process-
ing plant; county extension offices; and typical
rural communities.
In Nebraska the visitors will have an oppor-
tunity to see poultry processing, hybrid corn pro-
duction, sprinkler irrigation, and grain storage
methods. Next, the group is scheduled to travel
through South Dakota, with special attention to
livestock and grain farming.
In Minnesota they will be given an opportunity
to visit typical farms, a seed plant, cooperative
dairies and creameries, educational and experi-
mental institutions, the Minneapolis Grain Ex-
change, flour mills, and a farm equipment factory.
In Chicago, a 3-day itinerary is being set up
under the leadership of the Institute of Interna-
tional Education, working with a local public ad-
visory committee. It is expected to include such
divergent interests as a musical concert and a visit
to the stockyards.
* For a list of the 13 Soviet officials, see press release
305 of June 28.
The group will pay a brief visit to the citrus and
grape producing areas of California.
Upon completion of the tour, the delegation will
come to Washington. Here the members will visit
the Agriculture Department's Agricultural Re-
search Center at Beltsville, Md., and will be re-
ceived by the Secretary of Agriculture.
Four Americans will accompany the group
throughout the trip. One is John Strohm of
Woodstock, 111., editor of Ford Almanac, associate
editor of Better Farming Magazine, and past pres-
ident of the American Agricultural Editors Asso-
ciation. Following World War II, Mr. Strohm
traveled extensively in the Soviet Union as a guest
of the Ministry of Agriculture. At the request
of the Departments of Agriculture and State, he
is acting as U.S. public representative and will
coordinate arrangements with assisting groups.
The others assigned to the trip are Raymond P.
Christensen, agricultural economist of the Agri-
cultural Research Service, who will assist with
general arrangements; and Vladimir P. Prokofieff
and Vasia Gmirkin of the Department of State,
who will serve as interpreters.
Current Legislation on Foreign Policy:
84th Congress, 1st Session
Trade Agreements Extension. Hearings before the
Senate Committee on Finance on H. R. 1, an act to
extend the authority of the President to enter into
trade agreements under section 350 of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended, and for other purposes. Part 1 :
March 2-S, 1955, 626 pp. Part 2: March 8-14, 1955,
1,267 pp. Part 3 : March 15-18, 1955, 1,909 pp. Part 4 :
March 21-23, 1955, 2,352 pp.
Extending the Existing Authority for the Loan of a Small
Aircraft Carrier to the Government of France. Report
to accompany S. 1139. S. Rept. 133, April 1, 1955. 3 pp.
Departments of State and Justice, the Judiciary, and Re-
lated Agencies Appropriation Bill, Fiscal Year 1956.
Report to accompany H. R. 5502. H. Rept. 417, April 13,
1955. 25 pp.
United States Membership in an Organization for Trade
Cooperation. Message from the President requesting
enactment of legislation recommending U.S. member-
ship in an Organization for Trade Cooperation. H. Doc.
140, April 14, 1955. 12 pp.
Surplus Property. Letter from Chairman, Commission on
Organization of the Executive Branch of the Govern-
ment transmitting the Report on Use and Disposal of
Federal Surplus Property, pursuant to Public Law 108,
83d Congress. H. Doc. 141, April 18, 1955. 96 pp.
Second Supplemental Appropriation Bill, 1955. Confer-
ence report to accompany H. R. 4903. H. Rept. 426,
April 19, 1955. 7 pp.
Mutual Security Program. Message from the President
transmitting recommendations relative to a Mutual
Security Program. H. Doe. 144, April 20, 1955. 7 pp.
Transportation on Canadian Vessels to and Within
Alaska. Report to accompany S. 948. H. ReDt. 431
April 21, 1955. 3 pp.
152
Department of State Bulletin
Progress in the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands
Statements by Delmas H. Nucker
U.S. Special Representative in the Trusteeship Council
OPENING STATEMENT!
It is a privilege to appear before you as the Spe-
cial Representative of the Trust Territory of the
Pacific Islands to report the principal events
marking the progress of our administration since
July 1, 1954. 2 I shall try to discuss these events
briefly and comprehensively. Their details and
relevant statistics will be presented during the
question period to the extent they are called for by
specific inquiries. It is my hope that through this
meeting you may appraise the progress we have
made and I, in turn, may receive the benefits of the
views and recommendations of this Council.
This is the first time I have served in the capac-
ity of reporter to you. On August 16 of last year
I was appointed Deputy High Commissioner of
the trust territory, and since the resignation of
Mr. Midkiff on September 1 I have served also in
the higher role of Acting High Commissioner.
These dual responsibilities have caused me to make,
during the past 9 months, three complete tours
through the territory and three trips, prior to the
present, to Washington. While time consuming,
they have enabled me on the one hand to compre-
hend more clearly district-level problems and needs
and on the other to perceive better our relationship
to other agencies with which we must work. My
trips to the districts also enable me to attest to
several peculiar difficulties which confront the ad-
ministration of the trust territory. Chief among
these are the great expanses over which the terri-
tory extends, its small, scattered land area, its
' Made in the U. N. Trusteeship Council on June 14
(TJ. S./TJ. N. press release 2169). Mr. Nucker is Acting
High Commissioner of the Trust Territory of the Pacific
Islands.
2 For a review of the previous year by the former High
Commissioner, Frank E. Midkiff, see Bulletin of July 19,
1954, p. 96.
meager natural resources, the diversity of its insti-
tutions and languages, and the general simplicity
of its cultural background.
Administration
Most important among the events of general
administrative significance was the removal of
headquarters from Honolulu to Guam on Septem-
ber 29, 1954. This move brought our headquarters
into a more central position from the point of view
of the seven districts of the trust territory. It has
resulted in improved radio communication, more
frequent staff visits to the field, and a greater
number of district personnel visits to headquarters.
These have made possible an increased interchange
of ideas and views among our staff.
A second administrative change was the estab-
lishment of Rota as the seventh district of the
territory on March 10 of this year. This action
removed Rota from the anomalous position it had
previously occupied as neither district nor district
part, and permits the supervision of its activities
on the same basis as with the rest of the territory.
In numbers, our permanent personnel remains
substantially the same as last year. The slight
increase in our total staff — American from about
215 to 250 and Micronesian from about 1,260 to
1,475 — is primarily the result of our intensified
construction program. Hence it consists largely
of temporary personnel additions.
Economic Improvement
Several important events with fundamental
economic implications occurred during the past
year. Foremost among these was the December
31 liquidation of the Island Trading Company.
Though this government-sponsored company con-
July 25, 1955
153
tributed greatly to the economic development of
the territory to its very last, careful advance
planning prevented its liquidation from creating
an economic vacuum. The Micronesian-owned,
limited stock companies were strengthened in each
district so that they could adequately purchase
and collect the copra in the field. A contract was
entered into with a private firm under which it
took over the marketing of copra for the entire
territory under the jurisdiction of the Copra
Stabilization Board. The terms under which this
firm operates are as favorable to the Micronesians
as those previously offered by the Island Trading
Company. The sale of trade commodities to the
Micronesians, a service formerly performed by the
Trading Company, has also been assumed with
highly encouraging success by the local trading
companies.
In the second place, it has been decided to estab-
lish Majuro, the Marshalls District center, as a
world port for the entire trust territory and to
provide there the various facilities required. As
such a port, it is to function as the general copra-
shipping center for the trust territory. This plan
was put into effect in mid-October of last year
when the first strictly commercial ship called at
Majuro and took aboard 1,000 metric tons of copra
for Japanese discharge. Since then four other
ships have made this port of call. The establish-
ment of this important shipping point in the Mar-
shall Islands, while dictated by other considera-
tions, serves to aid the economy of the Marshalls,
which is particularly in need of help, and hence to
reduce the dependency of these islands on outside
assistance. Moreover, the lower freight rates
which have resulted constitute a direct benefit to
the producers.
Thirdly, the past year has marked the conclud-
ing phase of the Phosphate Mining Company's
operation on Angaur in the Palaus. All mining
has now ceased and efforts are concentrated in
backfilling, as I myself observed during my visit
to the island in May. The contract of this Jap-
anese owned and directed company will terminate
on June 30; it is our opinion that the limit to
which productive agricultural land can safely be
mined and therefore removed from crop produc-
tion has now been reached.
Indicative, too, of our gradual progress in the
economic sphere are three additional facts. First,
copra production again increased during the past
year. Whereas only 10,214 short tons were mar-
keted in the preceding fiscal year, in the present
fiscal year an estimated 12,120 short tons will be
sold, an increase of almost 20 percent. The mar-
keting of this copra crop will result in a revenue
of approximately $1,190,000. Secondly, trochus
production increased fourfold from 102 short tons
in 1953 to 449 short tons in 1954, and the income de-
rived from its sale soared from $18,439 to $151,310.
Third, during this fiscal year handicraft items
will produce a revenue of approximately $40,000,
a sum twice that realized in calendar year 1953.
Agriculture
During the past year, major moves have been
made to strengthen the agricultural program.
The funds allotted to it have been materially in-
creased. The agriculturists authorized for each
district have been increased to two, one to direct
the agricultural center and one to function as an
extension agent. In order to develop our cash
crops as well as the subsistence crops, two experts
have just been added to the staff ; they will assume
charge of our coconut improvement program and
will supervise our fishery and trochus-harvesting
programs.
In the Marshalls the pressure of the population
upon the land is greatest, the crop capabilities of
the soil are most limited, and the presence of dis-
placed island groups creates special problems.
There during the past year agriculture has re-
ceived particular attention. Perhaps our most
important action, from an agricultural point of
view, has been the establishment of the Jaluit
project. Tliis project will improve the subsistence
and cash crops most suited to the Marshallese soil
and climate, will develop superior cultivation
practices, and will disseminate these improved
plants and agricultural practices through the
atolls of the district.
In each district we are creating an agricultural
center, consisting of nurseries and experimental
plots, livestock and poultry breeding facilities, and
laboratories and offices. Experimental plantings
of cacao continue to be expanded in Yap, Ponape,
and Palau. An agricultural extension service is
being organized to offer Micronesians technical
advice on cultivation practices, to aid in the pro-
curing of their needed agricultm-al supplies, and
to help market their crops. A broad agricultural
education program, now being designed, will bring
154
Department of State Bulletin
important information on cultivation techniques
and conservation methods to both youth and
adult groups.
The Metalanim Plantation was placed on a
self-sustaining basis on July 1, 1954. The oper-
ation is sustained by the proceeds of its copra pro-
duction. It continues to experiment in coconut
and cacao cultivation and the breeding of cattle
and swine. The results of these experiments and,
to some extent, the actual improved plant and ani-
mal stock are made available to the Micronesians.
Our rhinoceros beetle eradication program con-
tinues to receive attention. It is being concen-
trated in the Palaus, where the ravages of this in-
sect were most severe. Although the pest is still
not eliminated, gradual progress in its control
and extermination is being made and new plant-
ings of coconut trees are now being started in
pest-free areas.
Finally, our agricultural program has as one of
its goals the improvement of the quality of the
present Micronesian animal and plant strains.
With this idea in mind, swine, poultry, and seeds
of commercial and subsistence crops have been
imported and distributed in the several districts.
Similar distributions have also been made from
the improved stock of our own Agriculture De-
partment.
Land Resettlement
A homesteading program has been inaugurated
to augment the economic resources of the Micro-
nesians and to alleviate the economic and social
pressures resulting from overpopulation. Under
this program plots of cultivable government land
are being placed in the hands of needy Microne-
sians. On Ponape, settlers from the densely pop-
ulated islands of Pingelap and Kapingamarangi
are already homesteading several thousand acres
of excellent land, most of which is planted to ma-
ture coconut trees. The Micronesian settlers
themselves shoulder the chief burdens incident to
their establishment in their new home. However,
they are being aided during their period of ad-
justment by their stay-at-home coislanders and,
primarily in transportation and initial financing,
by the trust territory administration.
In the Palaus the municipality of Peleliu has
started a 400-acre coconut plantation under pro-
visions of the homesteading program.
During the ensuing months the homesteading
program will move forward with the settling of
additional families from Pingelap and Kaping-
amarangi on Ponape. Homesteaders from other
overcrowded areas will also be placed on produc-
tive plots on Ponape and Rota, and in the Palaus,
and to a lesser extent in Truk and the Marshalls.
On Rota, Songsong Village, the only true com-
munity on the island, has been surveyed prelimi-
nary to the formal assigning of the village lots to
their present occupants. Also on this island the
boundaries between public and private lands are
now being mapped so that a broad homesteading
program may be inaugurated. Such a program
will mean much to the Rotanese, for 80 percent of
the land falls within the public domain. In the
Palaus approximately 300 acres have been made
available for home sites and garden plots and are
scheduled to be homesteaded by those families who
currently possess them under lease.
The administrative areas required for each of
our seven districts have either been determined or
are now being delineated by cadastral surveys.
As a result these areas in the Marshalls, Ponape,
Truk, and Palau will be reduced in size and the
released land will be returned to the Micronesians.
Claim Settlement
Definite progress is being made in the direction
of settling the several classes of claims held by the
Micronesians against the United States.
All property loss claims of the Rongelapese and
Uterikese resulting from the unfortunate fallout
of March 1 of last year have now been settled.
Several months prior to settlement, meetings were
held and notices posted to insure that each person
fully understands his rights. Many discussions
were held with the leaders. The attitude of the
Rongelapese and Uterikese people was very fair.
They took into consideration only actual "out of
pocket" losses. They gave the administration full
credit for past help given. These claims amounted
to $6,869.80. No personal injury claims were sub-
mitted by members of these two groups.
Funds have now been allocated to settle all yen
redemption claims, and wide publicity has been
given to the program throughout the territory.
By the end of April of this year a total of almost
$14,000 had been paid to Micronesians in full set-
tlement of all yen claims received to that time. It
is believed that this redemption program is now
virtually completed.
July 25, J 955
155
Work leading toward the settlement of our out-
standing land claims has continued with additional
impetus, with the establishment of new Land
Transfer Boards on Rota and in the Marshalls.
These important boards, which exercise general
advisory responsibility with regard to land mat-
ters, are now functioning in all districts. The
Land Claims Staff has been strengthened by the
addition of new employees, both American and
Micronesian. As a result, it has been able to make
more rapid progress in cadastral surveying, in
determining land ownership, and in supporting the
homesteading program.
The United States Government and certain of its
agencies continue to find it necessary to make use
of some land privately owned by Micronesians.
A careful study of the just claims for compensa-
tion of these territory citizens has been completed.
Much thought has been given to the question of the
compensation arrangements most appropriate to
the situation. Now at last we should be in a posi-
tion to effect claim settlements in the near future.
Education
The education of the Micronesians for their more
effective participation in their developing society
is regarded as one of the primary responsibilities
of our administration.
As with our other departments, both Microne-
sians and Americans comprise the personnel of the
Education Department. During the past year
three important positions were taken over by Mi-
cronesians for the first time. These were the po-
sition of Educational Administrator in the Mar-
shalls, which is occupied by Dwight Heine,
who appeared before you last year as the spokes-
man for the Marshallese; that of Supervisor of
Teacher Education in the Marshalls ; and that of
Principal of the Intermediate School at Palau.
Other administrative and advisory positions are
also coming to be held increasingly by Microne-
sians. The number of Micronesians in these posi-
tions increased last year from 63 to 75, a favor-
able change of 19 percent.
The increase in our Micronesian staff is making
it possible for our American educational person-
nel to devote less time to student teaching duties
and more to teacher aid and training. In Ponape
the entire American staff is now chiefly concerned
with the improvement of education in the off-
island and more rural communities, sometimes
spending months living in the villages themselves
so that they can become familiar with the local
cultural patterns and the teachers' problems.
According to preliminary estimates, our stu-
dent enrollment has climbed during the past year
from 8,113 students to 8,438 students, an increase
of about 4 percent. Moreover, the number of
Micronesian students who have sought education
outside the territory in this period has risen to
173, a gain of 31 percent over the preceding year.
To improve education at the elementary level,
minimum qualifications have now been estab-
lished for elementary teachers in two districts.
All elementary school teachers are now being paid
by their local communities. Boards of Education
have been organized in Palau and Truk during the
past year to match the boards and councils already
functioning in other areas. These boards and
councils are already giving important guidance to
the education administrators on special educa-
tional needs and desires of the people of their
communities.
During the year, 20 new elementary school
buildings or additions to old buildings have been
constructed. These have been built by the local
communities in accordance with our considered
policy of encouraging the Micronesians to develop
self-sufficiency to the maximum extent possible.
A territory-wide health education program, in
which both the education and the public-health
departments cooperate, is being developed. The
elements of hygiene and public health are being
brought to communities through extension pro-
grams and are being emphasized in all school
curricula. A school garden program has been in-
stituted with the aid of our agricultural depart-
ment in each of our intermediate schools and at
Pacific Island Central School at Truk. This is
designed to afford the students an opportunity to
learn the fundamentals of agricultural science and
to gain practical experience in cultivation pro-
cedures. It also allows the students to contribute
materially to their own maintenance, since the
food is served at their table. This program like-
wise is in line with our basic aim of encouraging
the development of local self-reliance.
Teaching aids, texts, and literature adapted to
the local environment and culture continue to be
prepared in English and in the languages of each
district and to be published on our own presses.
The Koror Community Center, an experiment in
156
Department of Slate Bulletin
community education, continues to make progress.
It is gradually achieving the development of a
community consciousness by bringing together the
dissident elements of Palauan society. Whereas
the center had previously been sponsored by the
South Pacific Commission, its support during the
present fiscal year has come entirely from trust
territory funds.
Public Health
The health of the Micronesians continues to
receive our closest attention.
The major illnesses of the territory remain tuber-
culosis and parasitic diseases of the gastrointes-
tinal tract. However, through the wide applica-
tion of new drugs, tuberculosis at last shows un-
mistakable signs of diminishing. The frequency
of leprosy is also declining. Moreover, the appli-
cation of the new curative techniques is shortening
the treatment time of the disease. This and other
factors are permitting us to move our leprous
patients from Tinian, where they have been receiv-
ing treatment, to the more familiar surroundings
of their home districts. There they will be given
further medication in leprosaria presently under
construction. It is expected that all will be
"home" by June 30 of this year. Fortunately no
epidemics of any sort occurred in the territory
during the past year.
As a result of our Micronesian training program,
our Public Health Department has found it pos-
sible to place greater responsibility upon Micro-
nesians in all its branches, ranging from medical
and nursing care to teaching and hospital adminis-
tration. Seven medical interns and 12 dental in-
terns — all 19 being graduates of the Central Med-
ical School at Suva — as well as 7 graduate nurses
from our Ponape Nursing School and a smaller
number of sanitarians and laboratory technicians
joined the staff this year. These personnel
changes have at the same time improved our health
program by strengthening the Micronesian con-
tribution to it and have allowed some reductions to
be made in our American staff with consequent sav-
ings to the administration. Continued progress
in this direction may be anticipated in the future.
This is foreshadowed by our present medical train-
ing program: during the current year, for ex-
ample, the number of medical graduates from Suva
receiving postgraduate training in Hawaii has
been increased from two to four.
The past year brought true hospital service to
Rota for the first time ; previously only dispensary
care was provided the Rotanese. New hospital
facilities are soon to be available in all districts but
the Marshalls. With these new facilities and an
increasing number of Micronesian practitioners,
we are confident that our medical program will
continue to progress in a satisfactory manner.
Given the cultural background of Micronesia,
the training of efficient local sanitation officers is a
difficult task. Nonetheless, through our newly
instituted formal program of sanitation education,
a general improvement in health conditions can
also be reported.
Construction
For the first time since the Department of the
Interior assumed the responsibility of the trust
territory administration, the United States Con-
gress has appropriated funds for the specific pur-
pose of constructing new facilities and undertak-
ing the much needed rehabilitation of present in-
stallations. A sum of $700,000 was made available
for this purpose on July 1, 1954. Since that date
we have been engaged energetically in getting the
program under way. This year we have confined
our activities to projects which are most sorely
needed to aid the economy of the islands. These
have included the construction of power plants,
warehouses, reefers, petroleum and water storage
facilities, roads, and harbor and docking installa-
tions. These projects have been divided among
all districts as need dictated.
It is hoped that an additional $700,000 will be
allocated to permit a continuation of the program
this year. In the belief that this will be so, our
present plans call for continuing our construction
and rehabilitation activities through the coming
year without interruption and at an accelerated
pace.
Our construction program, while impressive in
its extent and comprehensiveness, is closely geared
to the local economy. It is being carried out under
the direction of our own personnel, not by outside
private contractors. Moreover, we are employ-
ing local Micronesians as workers. Through this
employment policy the economic position of the
Micronesians is being enhanced, for the wages
paid them augment their purchasing power and
raise their standard of living to that extent.
July 25, 7955
157
Communication
Because of the enormous area over which the
trust territory extends and its small and scattered
land units, the problem of communication be-
tween and even within districts is one which is
constantly before us.
With regard to shipping, our present program
looks toward the achievement of three goals. We
desire first to place in the hands of established
shipping firms the total responsibility of maintain-
ing surface contact between the trust territory and
the outside world. Secondly, we desire to have the
Micronesians themselves, in the name of local trad-
ing companies or as individuals, assume the task
of providing intradistrict shipping to the largest
extent possible. During the fiscal year the first
two ships have been made available to the Micro-
nesians to further this aim. So that they may in-
creasingly assume this important function, we are
now taking action to place additional ships under
their ownership and control. Thirdly, it is our
hope that we may limit the role of the administra-
tion in the area of shipping to the operation of
interdistrict vessels. By the gradual attainment
of the first two of our objectives, the third comes
closer to our grasp.
In the realm of air transportation the past year
has seen us replace our amphibian PBY planes
with more modern amphibian SA-16's. These
afford us larger passenger accommodations, cruise
at greater speed, and possess safety features not
present in our former equipment.
Our radio communications system has been
measurably strengthened during the past fiscal
year. The broadcasting power of our established
stations at the district centers has been increased.
From our Guam headquarters, which is now our
main traffic station, we maintain voice contact
with each of the districts. Moreover, new second-
ary stations have been constructed on several of
the outer islands in the Truk and Marshalls dis-
tricts, and others are now being built in these dis-
tricts and in Ponape district. We hope that by
the close of fiscal year 1956 all important popula-
tion centers in the trust territory will have radio-
telephone contact with their respective district
centers. It is noteworthy, too, that Micronesians,
trained by us in radio skills, are filling both main-
tenance and operating positions more and more,
including even those with supervisory responsi-
bilities.
Displaced Marshallese
The displaced Bikini people, now settled on
Kili, have moved into the final phases of their eco-
nomic and social adjustment to their new environ-
ment. Continued aid, both material and directive,
has been given them during this past year. The
material assistance has included the importation
of thousands of superior taro plants to improve
their economic position and the installation of a
voice-radio link which permits communication,
through new facilities at Jaluit, with the district
center at Majuro. Their social and political prob-
lems are receiving the closest attention of our
Marshallese Kili project manager. His efforts are
being rewarded by a constant lessening of their
problems and the gradual emergence of a truly
integrated community. Arrangements are cur-
rently under way to purchase for the Kilians an
auxiliary schooner which they will be competent
to operate and by which they can maintain that
outside contact so necessary for their economic and
social progress.
A recent extensive survey of the Eniwetok peo-
ple now living on Ujelang in the Western Mar-
shalls indicates they have made great strides
toward complete adaptation to their new island.
Their needs are limited to that of improving their
cultivated plants and domestic animals and to that
of relieving their difficult logistic position.
Specific steps are being taken to meet both of these
needs.
The Rongelapese continue to be temporarily
settled in a specially constructed small village on
the island of Ejit, where they will remain until the
radioactivity on their home atoll has decayed suf-
ficiently so as to be safe for residence. Since the
March 1 test of 1954 a total of about $63,500 has
been spent in caring for these people and the
Uterikese, who, having been unharmed by the
fallout, were repatriated in May 1954. The direct
financial support which is being given the
Rongelapese now amounts to $1,300 monthly.
This sum provides for their subsistence and for
compensation for their lost copra production as
well as for incidental supplies necessary for their
maintenance. I am happy to report that the
periodic medical examinations given these Ronge-
lap people, both by special medical teams and by
our own Marshalls District physicians, continue
to reveal that they are in fine health, and all of
the skin lesions have healed. Frequent medical
158
Department of State Bulletin
examinations indicate likewise that the health of
the Uterikese remains excellent.
Government
In the area of native government the event of
greatest significance since July 1 of last year has
been the granting of a formal charter to the Palau
Congress. By this act the Congress was given a
certain measure of legislative power and with it
the responsibility of participating in the direction
of the political, economic, and social development
of their district.
In each district, island councils or congresses
have deliberated at some length during the year
upon the various problems affecting their respec-
tive areas. Their deliberations and conclusions
have greatly helped the district administration
staffs in their program and policy planning. One
of the foremost problems of general prevalence
has been that of instituting a taxation program.
This question has been met courageously by the
enactment of tax legislation. During this fiscal
year the Truk Congress has put into effect a one-
mill-per-pound sales tax on copra sold for export,
and the Marshallese Congress an import tax of 10
per 10 cigarettes. With its tax revenue each dis-
trict pays the salaries of its elementary school
teachers and health aides as well as the moderate
meeting expenses of the council or congress mem-
bers themselves. All these officials are now fully
paid. It is encouraging that the Micronesians are
willing to assume the financial burden of their
essential government services to the extent their
resources make this possible. It is obvious, how-
ever, that for some time local revenue must con-
tinue to be supplemented by sizable appropria-
tions from the United States Congress.
Conclusion
In this brief review I have attempted to enumer-
ate only what we believe to be our chief accomplish-
ments of the past year. I have not taken your time
to summarize our achievements of a less important
nature. Nor have I devoted attention to the more
general, basic propositions which underlie the
thinking of our administration in establishing its
policies and set the pattern of its actions.
I desire now only to assure you once more that
all our actions are taken with the aim of adminis-
tering the territory so as to bring to the Micro-
Jo/y 25, 7955
Trusteeship Council Faces New Year
Statement by Mason Sears
U.S. Representative in the Trusteeship Council 1
It looks as if the Trusteeship Council faces a year
of high purpose and great interest.
For the first time we will be concerned with the
mechanics of territorial self-determination. There
are also other developments of an extremely impor-
tant nature to be considered. These will involve two
missions to West Africa in the summer.
A special mission will go to British Togoland to
find out how Togolauders can best express their
wishes about uniting with the Gold Coast upon its
independence, which may come next year. This will
probably lead to the first popular referendum under
the international trusteeship system.
Another mission will go to the British Cameroons,
where there may be a second referendum in the near
future in connection with prospective Nigerian in-
dependence. I may say here that if Nigerian inde-
pendence works out in the near future and they be-
come self-governing as a federation, it will be by far
the largest nation south of the Equator in Africa.
These missions will be most important because
West African developments are going to be followed
with the closest attention throughout Africa.
At all events, the Council, operating as the eyes
and ears of the United Nations, may be expected to
play an increasingly useful role in the progress of
trust territories toward self-government.
In the Pacific we operate at the center of the ad-
justment of formerly isolated peoples to a rapidly
contracting world. Some people, like those in New
Guinea, are just emerging from isolation and from a
condition of almost perpetual tribal warfare. Oth-
ers, like those in Western Samoa, are considering
the form of self-government most suitable to their
society.
In Africa particularly, we operate at the very
heart of the awakening of a modern African society.
And the course Africa chooses to take in the coming
years and its importance to the peace and security
of the world cannot be overstressed and should be
more widely recognized.
In the meantime we have before us the prospect of
millions of Africans and Pacific Islanders who, if
given the proper impetus, can contribute enormously
to the welfare of themselves and all mankind.
It is this that makes the work of this Council so
challenging.
1 Made in the U.N. Trusteeship Council on June 8,
after Mr. Sears had been elected President of the
Council (U.S./U.N. press release 2167).
nesians a maximum of benefit. Our administra-
tion continues to honor their customs and desires
by taking them into serious consideration in every
159
way possible. It is the firm intention of our
administration to guide the Micronesians through
a gradual, evolutionary development in which the
new may be blended with the familiar old. We
desire to avoid whenever we can abrupt modifica-
tions of their customs and ways of thought, for
these are potentially disruptive to their society.
When possible, we intend to aid them, not to direct
them; we intend to assist them to attain the
changes they themselves desire, not to compel them
to adopt innovations which seem wise to us but are
unacceptable to them. Finally, by following these
principles we desire to increase their economic and
political strength in the direction of self-suffi-
ciency.
I am grateful for this opportunity to present this
report and will be pleased to provide, to the best of
my ability, any additional information which
members of the Council may desire in connection
with either this statement or our annual report. 3
CLOSING STATEMENT «
May I first say how sincerely I appreciate the
generous remarks of the various representatives
yesterday concerning both myself and our admin-
istration of the Trust Territory of the Pacific
Islands. It has been a very enjoyable experience
for me to appear here, and I have been most grate-
ful for the understanding that has been shown for
the problems involved in our administration.
There were a few comments made yesterday re-
garding which it might be of assistance to the
Council if I were to comment. Several delegates
expressed their concern that coordination be-
tween the Navy administration in Saipan and the
administration of the remainder of the territory
is not as close as it might be. I appreciate that
this division in the administrative structure of
the trust territory easily gives rise to such con-
cern. Nevertheless, with the Commander of
Naval Forces Marianas and myself both being lo-
cated on Guam, close liaison between us is easily
achieved. Our respective staffs are likewise in
ready contact with one another, and a constant ex-
change of information takes place. Moreover, a
free and easy exchange of views and discussion
a U.N. doc. T/1173 dated May 3, 1955.
1 Made in the U. N. Trusteeship Council on June 21
(U. S./U. N. press release 2177).
of problems takes place in Washington between
staffs of the Interior and Navy Departments. As
a result, I believe that the programs in Saipan
and the remainder of the trust territory are closely
comparable. I do not envisage any problems aris-
ing that could not be resolved by agreement be-
tween the Departments of the Navy and Interior.
Obviously, if they could not be so resolved, the
decision would be made at the White House.
Political Development Program
I am indeed grateful that so many members of
the Council expressed satisfaction in the manner
in which our political development program is
being conducted, and I was particularly gratified
to hear the representative of India describe it as
"realistic." We sincerely believe it to be so. We
also agree with the comment of the representa-
tive of India that much remains to be done. The
district advisory bodies are at this time only ad-
visory. However, the establishment of a broad
base of elected municipal officials and the setting
up of advisory bodies are themselves significant
steps in the light of the past history of the area.
The district bodies will steadily gain in experience,
and, when they do, they will take on increased
powers. To force such powers upon them before
they are truly representative of their districts and
before they have sufficient position and experience
might well result in a disservice to the progress of
self-government in the territory. Likewise, the
too rapid establishment of formal interdistrict
organs without a solid foundation of community
feeling based upon knowledge and experience in
common problems could result in emphasizing
differences rather than unity. Such governmental
machinery is always more successful when estab-
lished as a result of desire than when created pre-
maturely without the foundation to appreciate its
function and purpose.
The time will come when an interdistrict link
will fit well into place. As the Council has previ-
ously been advised, it is our feeling that a central
legislative body will not come about for some years.
In the meantime, I believe it is wisest to insure the
effectiveness of the municipal and district govern-
mental machinery. Our educational program,
further territory-wide meetings such as that held
at Truk, our continued advancement of Micro-
nesians in the administration, and similar steps
160
Department of State Bulletin
will increase the knowledge and understanding of
common problems and interests between the dis-
tricts.
The fact that only 8 chiefs are appointed as
magistrates, that only 12 chiefs were elected as
magistrates while 80 nonchiefs were elected as
magistrates, is in my opinion a sign of a growing
acceptance of democratic principle — not the re-
verse, as indicated by the delegate from the
U.S.S.R. Moreover, the district advisory bodies
are presently exercising a valuable role as a result
of the consultations held with them by the district
administrators. In expressing their views on
questions of district administration, these bodies
are not only providing us with guidance but are
also obtaining valuable experience in democratic
government.
Communications
The representative of India has suggested that
greater emphasis on communications is needed.
We have recognized the importance of communica-
tions, and significant steps are being taken to im-
prove it. We are continually increasing the num-
ber of outer islands upon which radios are being
placed for contact with the district centers. Addi-
tionally, two privately owned radio broadcast sta-
tions have been established, one at Majuro and one
at Truk. We look forward to further such devel-
opments as a means of bringing the people closer
together and of disseminating information.
The other day, when asked if there were a news-
paper published for circulation in the entire trust
territory, I neglected to mention the Micronesian
Monthly, which is a periodical published at our
office on Guam and distributed to the districts.
This publication contains news about each of the
districts and carries feature stories on the history
and culture of the area as well as on our various
programs. It serves perhaps to fill somewhat the
purpose the delegate of India had in mind.
I have already commented in my opening state-
ment upon our continued advancement of Micro-
nesians to fill positions of increased responsibility
in the territory. It is not our intention to create
an ever-growing civil service for Americans in the
trust territory. It is rather our intention to re-
place stateside employees with Micronesians just
as soon as possible. Here again, however, training
and experience are required. We have made the
greatest progress in this replacement program in
our educational and health departments. It has
contributed to the reduced expenditures in those
departments regarding which several delegations
have expressed their concern.
I believe one of the objectives of this Council, as
well as our administration, is to create self-reliance
in the Micronesians. This can only come about as
Micronesians become capable of accepting and
discharging those responsibilities inherent in any
effort to become self-governing and self-support-
ing.
I believe, therefore, the Council should look
forward to further and continued reductions in the
number of American personnel in the administra-
tion. This will come about as we feel we can do so
without jeopardizing either the needed programs
in the territory or the Micronesians' ability to con-
tinually move toward the ultimate goals of self-
government and economic independence.
In the economic field I believe the land situa-
tion requires some clarification. I would like to
assure the representative of Syria that our home-
steading program is not a substitute for the set-
tlement of land claims. It is rather a means for
placing into the hands of the people unclaimed
land which is owned by the government of the
trust territory. The land against which the.
Micronesians have unsettled claims is only that
privately owned land which has been utilized in
the past, or is presently being utilized, for ad-
ministrative or other purposes. With respect to
the public domain, which is the land previously
acquired in title by the Japanese administration,
there are very few claims. It is from this public
domain that land is being returned to the people
by means of the homesteading program. In gen-
eral, virtually all of this land that is arable and
not required for watersheds, forest reserve, or
similar public purpose will in time go into the
hands of the people. It must, however, be turned
over in an orderly manner according to need. Rec-
ognition must be given to the fact that one reason
the Japanese took over the land as public domain
is because the Micronesians were not settled upon
it. Much of it is not suitable for settlement.
Those areas that are so suited should go into the
hands of those who need it most. This is the pur-
pose of our homesteading program.
With respect to the overall economy of the trust
territory I wish to assure the Council that we will
July 25, 1955
161
continue our stepped-up efforts to improve both
subsistence and export crops. The Council may
be interested to know that over 100,000 cacao
trees have already been set out in the territory.
I anticipate that the experts we are employing for
our copra program and for trochus and fisheries
will be of considerable benefit in improving pro-
duction in these items. We are hopeful that the
increase in handicraft exports can be continued.
The fight against the rhinoceros beetle and the
giant African snail will also continue.
"We. shall look further into the possibility of
mining the bauxite and manganese deposits. On
the basis of our past experience and knowledge of
the quality of these deposits, however, I cannot
be too sanguine.
Taxation
Several suggestions regarding additional means
of taxation have been made. Copra is already
carrying a heavy burden of taxation. Whether
additional taxes on it would be wise is a matter
that will require further study. As regards the
possibility of an income tax, I believe that the
administrative expense in collecting such a tax
would be out of proportion to the returns. More-
over, it is not a tax flexible enough to take into
account the extended family or group-type of
effort such as is used for the production of copra,
handicraft, trochus, and other items.
I appreciate the suggestions that have been
made regarding training in seamanship and the
formation of producer and consumer coopera-
tives. We shall study both of these matters fur-
ther upon my return to Guam.
The suggestion has been made that we should
have two budgets for the territory, one for local
revenues and one for appropriated funds. While
the suggestion has some merit in letting the people
know what their money is spent for, I feel that as
yet the complications of budgeting on a territory-
wide basis are not sufficiently understood by the
people to permit them to benefit from such a pro-
cedure. Moreover, until the local revenues con-
stitute a greater portion of the total budget, I
question whether the additional complications in-
volved in a dual budgeting process would be off-
set by the value of such a technique. At the
present time, experience is being gained by the
people through their municipal budgets.
Public Health Program
In the field of public health we intend to con-
tinue our presently effective program. Attention
has been called to our reduced expenditures, and
the conclusion has been drawn by some that be-
cause we are spending less money the public health
program is not continuing to progress. I believe
the real test lies in the health of the people rather
than in the expenditure of money. And, as I men-
tioned in my opening statement, continued
progress is being made in reducing tuberculosis,
leprosy, and other health problems. Environ-
mental sanitation requires additional attention
and is receiving it through education and the train-
ing of Micronesian sanitarians.
As it was brought out during the questioning
period, two reasons for the lower expenditures on
public health during the year were the return of
additional medical and dental graduates from the
Suva Medical School and the acquisition without
cost of materials surplus to the needs of federal
government agencies. A further contributing fac-
tor was a reduction in the number of leper pa-
tients being maintained at the leper colony on
Tinian. Nevertheless, I do not feel that the test
of the effectiveness of the program lies entirely in
whether or not a certain sum of money is spent
upon it.
Several members of the Council recommended
that the adoption of certain International Labor
Organization conventions would benefit the in-
habitants of the territory. I wish to assure the
Council that the Ilo conventions are not casu-
ally dismissed or shunted aside. Each one is care-
fully studied as to its appropriateness for condi-
tions in the territory. We generally find that we
do not disagree with the objectives of such con-
ventions, but we do find that for the most part they
are directed to conditions quite different from
those prevailing in the territory.
Also in the social field the suggestion was made
yesterday that we should reduce the differences in
standards of living throughout the territory. I
believe there will always be substantial difference
in standards of living between the small outlying
islands and the larger islands and also between
the larger islands themselves. This seems inevi-
table simply because of the differences in the suit-
ability of these islands for the production of vari-
ous crops and the amount of land available. Our
efforts to introduce new crops and to expand pro-
162
Department of State Bulletin
duction in old ones will help to modify differences
in the productivity and income of various areas.
It will not, however, equalize them, and I cannot
visualize a subsidization program to create such
equality.
Education
With respect to our educational program, I was
most pleased that the orientation of our curricu-
lum to the needs of the people in Micronesia met
with the approval of several members of the Coun-
cil. Other comments in this field centered first
upon the administration providing increased and
better school facilities for communities that can-
not afford them, and second upon the leveling of
teachers' salaries throughout the territory.
Both of these points touch upon what to my
mind are fundamental problems. I do not believe
there is a single island or community in the trust
territory that cannot provide an adequate elemen-
tary school. It must be remembered that a school
building in this area need not be an expensive
undertaking. The basic materials are usually at
hand, and virtually all that is required is com-
munity effort to erect the building. We endeavor
to instill this effort into the community because it
helps to increase the value attached to, and the
support given, the educational program. On the
other hand, at the intermediate and the Pacific
Islands Central School level the administration
itself accepts the direct responsibility for school
facilities.
As regards the salaries of the elementary school
teachers, it is to my knowledge an accepted fact
that teaching salaries vary with the economic con-
ditions of areas in which the services are per-
formed. Within the United States itself, for in-
stance, salaries of teachers vary between different
sections of the country and between states within
an area. To make all teachers' salaries the same
throughout the trust territory would overlook the
basic fact that the level of economy in the trust
territory is not uniform throughout and that sal-
aries in any given area must bear a relationship to
the economy and to the income of other persons
on the island. I believe it has been most hearten-
ing that the local communities are now giving
additional support to their teachers and that in
several cases action has been recommended by the
advisory bodies for district-wide action to insure
the payment of elementary teachers' salaries. This
is the type of support and understanding we have
been seeking to engender by calling upon munici-
palities to accept their responsibilities for ele-
mentary education.
As this support grows further, and as apprecia-
tion for the benefit of education grows, I am con-
fident that voluntary action will be taken to insure
that elementary school teachers' salaries are at an
equitable level. Moreover, our educational ad-
ministrators will constantly be discussing the ques-
tion with local leaders to insure that elementary
education and the position of teachers are receiv-
ing the proper support of the communities. We
recognize that in the long run education is basic to
all that we are trying to accomplish in the terri-
tory. We cannot, therefore, permit the program
to fail.
We have noted the comments of the United Na-
tions Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organi-
zation and will take them into account in the
planning of our future educational program as
Several representatives in the Council have sug-
gested.
TREATY INFORMATION
Current Actions
MULTILATERAL
Copyright
Universal copyright convention. Done at Geneva Septem-
ber 6, 1952.
Ratifications deposited: Germany, June 3, 1955 ; Monaco,
June 16, 1955.
Enters into force: September 16, 1955.
Protocol 1 concerning the application of the convention to
the works of stateless persons and refugees. Done at
Geneva September 6, 1952.
Ratifications deposited: Germany, June 3, 1955 ; Monaco,
June 16, 1955.
Enters into force: September 16, 1955.
Protocol 2 concerning the application of the convention to
the works of certain international organizations. Done
at Geneva September 6, 1952.
Ratifications deposited: Germany, June 3, 1955 ; Monaco,
June 16, 1955.
Enters into force: September 16, 1955.
Protocol 3 concerning the effective date of instruments of
ratification, or acceptance of, or accession to the con-
vention. Done at Geneva September 6, 1952. Entered
into force August 19, 1954; for the United States De-
cember 6, 1954.
Ratification deposited: Germany, June 3, 1955.
Finance
Articles of Agreement of the International Monetary
Fund. Opened for signature at Washington December
July 25, 7955
163
27, 1945. Entered into force December 27, 1945. TIAS
1501.
Signature and acceptance: Afghanistan, July 14, 1955.
Articles of Agreement of the International Bank for Re-
construction and Development. Opened for signature
at Washington December 27, 1945. Entered into force
December 27, 1945. TIAS 1502.
Signature and acceptance: Afghanistan, July 14, 1955.
Germany
Agreement on German external debts. Signed at London
February 27, 1953. Entered into force September 16,
1953. TIAS 2792.
Accession deposited: Finland, May 26, 1955.
Telecommunications
International telecommunication convention. Signed at
Buenos Aires December 22, 1952. Entered into force
January 1, 1954.
Ratification deposited: Lebanon, June 2, 1955; United
States, June 27, 1955.
Final protocol to the international telecommunication
convention. Signed at Buenos Aires December 22, 1952.
Entered into force January 1, 1954.
Ratification deposited: Lebanon, June 2, 1955; United
States, June 27, 1955.
Additional protocols to the international telecommunica-
tion convention. Signed at Buenos Aires December 22,
1952. Entered into force December 22, 1952.
Ratification deposited: Lebanon, June 2, 1955!
Trade and Commerce
Agreement on Organization for Trade Cooperation Done
at Geneva March 10, 1955. 1
Signatures: Greece, June 21, 1955; Turkey, 2 June 21.
Proces-verbal extending validity of the declaration of Oc-
tober 24, 1953, regulating commercial relations between
certain contracting parties to the General Agreement on
Tariffs and Trade and Japan. Done at Geneva Febru-
ary 1, 1955. Entered into force February 1, 1955.
Declaration deposited (recognizing signature as bind-
ing) : Austria, June 28, 1955.
Fourth protocol of rectifications and modifications to an-
nexes and texts of the schedules to the General Agree-
ment on Tariffs and Trade. Done at Geneva March 7
1955. 1
Signatures: Canada, June 6, 1955; Greece, June 21 1955-
Turkey, 2 June 21, 1955.
Declaration on continued application of schedules to the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Done at Ge-
neva March 10, 1955. Entered into force March 10 1955
Signatures: Australia June 30, 1955'
Canada June 23, 1955
Cuba June 30, 1955
Czechoslovakia June 29, 1955
France June 30, 1955
India June 27, 1955
Luxembourg June 24, 1955
Netherlands June 28, 1955
New Zealand June 25, 1955
Norway June 30, 1955
Pakistan June 30, 1955
Turkey June 21, 1955
Union of South Africa June 28, 1955
United Kingdom June 23, 1955
Uruguay June 30, 1955
Declaration dejjosited {recognizing signature as bind-
ing): Sweden, June 15, 1955.
Protocol amending part I and articles XXIX and XXX of
the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Done at
Geneva March 10, 1955. 1
Signatures: Greece, June 21, 1955; Canada, June 23,
1955.
1 Not in force.
2 Signed ad referendum.
Protocol amending preamble and parts II and III of the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Done at Ge-
neva March 10, 1955. 1
Signatures: Greece, June 21, 1955; Canada, June 23,
1955.
Protocol of organizational amendments to the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Done at Geneva
March 10, 1955. 1
Signature: Greece, June 21, 1955.
Protocol of terms of accession of Japan to the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Done at Geneva June
7, 1955. 1
Signatures: Chile, 2 June 13, 1955; Pakistan, June 30,
1955.
Declaration deposited (recognising signature as bind-
ing) : Uruguay, June 22, 1955.
BILATERAL
Chile
Agreement extending and amending the agreement for
a cooperative program of technical assistance to medium
and small industry of June 30, 1952 (TIAS 2750), and
providing financial contributions therefor. Signed at
Santiago March 17, 1955. Entered 1 into force March
17, 1955.
Germany
Mutual defense assistance agreement. Signed at Bonn
June 30, 1955. Enters into force upon the deposit of
an instrument of ratification by the Federal Republic
with the United States.
Arrangement for the return of equipment pursuant to the
mutual defense assistance agreement of June 30, 1955.
Effected by exchange of notes at Bonn June 30, 1955.
Enters into force on the same date as the mutual defense
assistance agreement of June 30, 1955.
Air transport agreement, with exchanges of notes. Signed
at Washington July 7, 1955. Enters into force on the
date of receipt by the United States of notification of
approval by the Federal Republic of Germany.
Greece
Agreement to facilitate interchange of patent rights and
technical information for defense purposes. Signed at
Athens June 16, 1955. Entered into force June 16, 1955.
Israel
Agreement for cooperation concerning civil uses of atomic
energy. Signed at Washington July 12, 1955. Entered
into force July 12, 1955.
Korea
Agreement relating to the establishment of minimum fa-
cilities for an arsenal and the reworking of ammuni-
tion. Effected bv exchange of notes at Seoul May 29,
1955. Entered into force May 29, 1955.
Peru
Agreement providing for disposition of equipment and
materials furnished by the United States under the
military assistance agreement of February 22, 1952
(TIAS 2466). Effected by exchange of notes at Lima
March 22 and April 30, 1955. Entered into force April
30, 1955.
Thailand
Agreement relating to surplus agricultural commodities.
Signed at Bangkok June 21, 1955. Entered into force
June 21, 1955.
Agreement amending the agreement of July 1, 1950, as
amended (TIAS 2095 and 2809), relating to the financ-
ing of certain educational exchange programs. Effected
by exchange of notes at Bangkok June 23, 1955. Entered
into force J*une 23, 1955.
164
Department of State Bulletin
U.S.S.R.
Protocol defining the location of the boundary of Greater
Berlin, with annex. Signed at Berlin June 25, 1955.
Entered into force June 25, 1955.
PUBLICATIONS
Foreign Relations Volume
Press release 343 dated June 10
The Department of State on June 18 released
Foreign Relations of the United States, 1939,
Volume IV. This is the second in a series of five
volumes of diplomatic correspondence to be pub-
lished for the year 1939. Volume III, already
published, deals with the undeclared war in the
Far East between China and Japan. The present
volume completes the record on the Far East and
also gives that on the Near East and Africa.
The first 441 pages of volume IV give docu-
mentation on particular problems arising from
Japan's undeclared war on China: American in-
terest in Japanese demands threatening the in-
tegrity of the International Settlements at
Shanghai and Amoy and the British Concession
at Tientsin, the protection of American lives and
property, the drug traffic in occupied China, and
rights of American citizens in Manchuria.
There is no separate section on China for 1939,
all subjects treated regarding that country being
covered by the record on the undeclared war.
A section on Japan, 33 pages, completes the
documentation on the Far East. Political devel-
opments in Japan of special importance with re-
gard to international relations are reported,
notably the resignation of the Baron Hiranuma
Cabinet resulting from "the colossal miscalcula-
tions of the military with regard to European
affairs" in failing to foresee the Hitler-Stalin deal
(pp. 447^49).
A friendly gesture by the United States to Ja-
pan is recorded in papers on the return to Japan
of the ashes of the late Japanese Ambassador
Hirosi Saito on the United States cruiser Astoria
(pp. 455^161). Other subjects treated regarding
Japan are trade matters.
The remainder of the documentation in this
volume, covering the Near East and Africa, 415
pages, contains sections on Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran,
Iraq, Liberia, Morocco, Palestine, Saudi Arabia,
Syria and Lebanon, and Turkey.
The major portion of the subjects for the Near
East and Africa concerns trade relations and the
protection of the rights of American citizens and
of American educational and missionary interests.
Questions of political importance are the interest
of the United States in the defense and security of
Liberia and in British policy regarding Palestine
and the establishment of diplomatic relations with
Saudi Arabia.
Copies of this volume (iv, 905 pp.) may be pur-
chased from the Superintendent of Documents,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington
25, D. O, for $3.50 each.
Recent Releases
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Gov-
ernment Printing Office, Washington 25, D. O. Address
requests direct to the Superintendent of Documents, ex-
cept in the case of free publications, which may be obtained
from the Department of State.
Education, Cooperative Program in Bolivia, Additional
Financial Contributions. TIAS 2939. Pub. 5476. 4
pp. 50.
Agreement between the United States and Bolivia. Ex-
change of notes — Signed at La Paz June 30, 1952. En-
tered into force June 30, 1952.
Consular Officers, Free Entry Privileges. TIAS 2956.
Pub. 5501. 3 pp. 50.
Agreement between the United States and Iraq. Ex-
change of notes— Dated at Washington March 14, May 15,
June 19, and August 8, 1951. Entered into force August 8,
1951.
Mutual Defense Assistance. TIAS 2957. Pub. 5523. 46
pp. 200.
Agreement, with annexes, between the United States and
Japan— Signed at Tokyo March 8, 1954. Entered into
force May 1, 1954.
Mutual Defense Assistance, Arrangements for Return of
Equipment. TIAS 2958. Pub. 5525. 8 pp. 100.
Agreement between the United States and Japan— Signed
at Tokyo March 8, 1954. Entered into force May 1, 1954.
Foreign Service Personnel, Free Entry Privileges. TIAS
2961. Pub. 5505. 2 pp. 50.
Agreement between the United States and Liberia. Ex-
change of notes— Signed at Washington May 2 and July 22,
1949. Entered into force July 22, 1949.
Colon Free Zone, Sump-Pump Station. TIAS 2966.
Pub. 5516. 5 pp. 5$.
Agreement between the United States and Panama.
Exchange of notes— Signed at Panama March 8 and 25,
1954. Entered into force March 25, 1954.
Military Advisory Mission to Brazil. TIAS 2970. Pub.
5520. 3 pp. 5tf.
July 25, 1955
165
Agreement between the United States and Brazil, extend-
ing agreement of July 29, 1948. Exchange of notes —
Signed at Washington July 21 and September 23, 1952.
Entered into force September 23, 1952; operative retro-
actively July 29, 1952.
Foreign Service Personnel, Free Entry Privileges. TIAS
2971. Pub. 5521. 2 pp. 50.
Agreement between the United States and Uruguay.
Exchange of notes — Signed at Washington October 31
and November 12, 1952. Entered into force November 12,
1952.
Technical Cooperation, Erosion Control and Soil Con-
servation Programs in British Caribbean Area. TIAS
2974. Pub. 5529. 6 pp. 50.
Agreement between the United States and the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Ex-
change of notes— Signed at Washington January 12 and
20, 1954. Entered into force January 20, 1954.
Foreign Service Personnel, Free Entry Privileges.
TIAS 2989. Pub. 5552. 2 pp. 50.
Agreement between the United States and the Dominican
Republic. Exchange of notes — Dated at Washington
January 12 and 23, 1950. Entered into force January 23,
1950.
Mutual Defense Assistance, Disposition of Surplus Equip-
ment and Materials. TIAS 3029. Pub. 5628. 8 pp. 100.
Memorandum of Understanding and exchange of notes
between the United States and Luxembourg, implement-
ing agreement of January 8, 1952 — Signed at Luxembourg
July 7, 1954. Entered into force July 7, 1954.
Friendship, Commerce and Navigation. TIAS 3057.
Pub. 5677. 91 pp. 300
Treaty between the United States and Greece — Signed
at Athens August 3, 1951. Entered into force October 13,
1954. And exchange of notes— Dated at Athens August 3
and December 26, 1951.
Mutual Defense Treaty. TIAS 3097. Pub. 5720. 9
pp. 100.
Treaty between the United States and the Republic of
Korea — Signed at Washington October 1, 1953. Entered
into force November 17, 1954.
North Atlantic Treaty, Headquarters of the Supreme
Allied Commander Atlantic. TIAS 3113. Pub. 5757.
4 pp. 54.
Agreement and exchange of letters between the United
States and the Headquarters of the Supreme Allied Com-
mander Atlantic — Signed at Washington October 22, 1954.
Entered into force October 22, 1954; operative retro-
actively April 10, 1954.
Education, Cooperative Program in Panama— Additional
Financial Contributions. TIAS 2925. Pub. 5440. 4 pp.
50.
Agreement between the United States and Panama. Ex-
change of notes — Signed at Panama February 29 and April
9, 1952. Entered into force April 9, 1952.
Loan to Pakistan for Emergency Wheat Purchase. TIAS
2927. Pub. 5445. 4 pp. 50.
Agreement between the United States and Pakistan. Ex-
change of notes — Dated at Washington September 17,
1952. Entered into force September 17, 1952.
Agreement between the United States and Afghanistan.
Exchange of notes — Signed at Washington March 20, 1954.
Entered into force March 20, 1954.
Termination of Reciprocal Trade Agreement of July 21,
1942. TIAS 2937. Pub. 5474. 6 pp. 50.
Agreement between the United States and Uruguay. Ex-
change of notes — Signed at Montevideo November 30,
1953 ; operative December 28, 1953 and related exchange
of notes — Signed at Montevideo January 7 and March
17, 1954.
Military Assistance. TIAS 2940. Pub. 5477. 19 pp. 150.
Agreement between the United States and Nicaragua —
Siened at Managua April 23, 1954. Entered into force
April 23, 1954.
Customs Concessions on Automobiles. TIAS 2941.
Pub. 5478. 3 pp. 50.
Provisional agreement between the United States and
Chile. Exchange of notes — Signed at Santiago June 8
and 23, 1953. Entered into force June 23, 1953 ; operative
retroactively March 16, 1953.
Technical Cooperation, Program of Water Utilization in
Agricultural Production in Provinces of Concepcion,
Nuble, and Maule. TIAS 2942. Pub. 5479. 20 pp. 150.
Agreement between the United States and Chile — Signed
at Santiago June 27, 1953. Entered into force June 27,
1953.
THE DEPARTMENT
Appointments
Howard P. Jones as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Far
Eastern Economic Affairs, effective July 16 (press release
432 dated July 15).
Designations
Robert J. Ryan as Executive Director of the Bureau of
Near Eastern, South Asian and African Affairs, effective
July 11.
FOREIGN SERVICE
Emergency Wheat Aid to Afghanistan.
Pub. 5463. 3 pp. 50.
TIAS 2934.
Designations
Harold M. Randall as U.S. Representative on the Inter-
American Economic and Social Council of the Organiza-
tion of American States, effective July 15 (press release
434).
166
Department of State Bulletin
July 25, 1955
Index
Vol. XXXIII, No. 839
Agriculture. Exchange of Agricultural Delegations With U.S.S.R . 161
American Republics
The Responsibility of the American Republics in World Affairs
(Holland) 135
U.S. Position on Proposed Inter-American Bank 140
Aviation. Air Transport Agreement With Germany (texts of agree-
ment, statement, and U.S. and German notes) 146
Claims and Property. Reciprocal War Damage Agreement With
Luxembourg 150
Congress, The. Current Legislation 162
Economic Affairs
Air Transport Agreement With Germany (texts of agreement, state-
ment, and U.S. and German notes) 145
Change in Termination Date of U.S.-Ecuadoran Agreement .... 140
U.S. Position on Proposed Inter-American Bank 140
Ecuador. Change in Termination Date of U.S.-Ecuadoran Agreement . 140
Educational Exchange. Renewal of Educational Exchange Agree-
ment With France 141
Europe
Paris and Geneva Meetings (Dulles) 132
To Seek the Road to Peace (Eisenhower) 131
Foreign Service. Appointment (RandBll) 166
France. Renewal of Educational Exchange Agreement With France . 141
Germany
Air Transport Agreement With Germany (texts of agreement, state-
ment, and U.S. and German notes) 145
Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement With Federal Republic of
Germany (text of agreement) 142
International Organizations and Meetings. Appointment (Randall). 166
Luxembourg. Reciprocal War Damage Agreement With Luxem-
bourg 150
Military Affairs. Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement With Fed-
eral Republic of Germany (text of agreement) 142
Mutual Security. Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement With
Federal Republic of Germany (text of agreement) 142
Non-Self-Governing Territories
Progress in the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands (Nucker) ... 153
Trusteeship Council Faces New Year (Sears) 169
North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Paris and Geneva Meetings
(Dulles) 132
Presidential Documents
John Marshall Bicentennial Month 133
To Seek the Road to Peace 131
Publications
Foreign Relations Volume 166
Recent Releases 165
State, Department of
Appointment (Jones) 166
Designations (Ryan) 166
Treaty Information
Change in Termination Date of U.S.-Ecuadoran Agreement 140
Current Actions 163
Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement With Federal Republic of
Germany (text of agreement) 142
Reciprocal War Damage Agreement With Luxembourg 150
Renewal of Educational Exchange Agreement With France 141
U.S.S.R.
Exchange of Agricultural Delegations With U.S.S.R 161
Pravda Correspondent Permitted To Attend Shakespeare Festival
(text of U.S. note) 134
United Nations
Fifth National UNESCO Conference To Meet at Cincinnati .... 134
Progress in the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands (Nucker) . . . 163
Trusteeship Council Faces New Year (Sears) 169
Name Index
Dulles, Secretary 132
Eisenhower, President 131, 133
Holland, Henry F 135
Hoover, Herbert, Jr 145
Jones, Howard P 166
Nucker, Delmas H 153
Randall, Harold M 166
Ryan, Robert J 166
Sears, Mason 159
Check List of Department of State
Press Releases: July 11 — 17
Releases may be obtained from the News Division,
Department of State, Washington 25, D. C.
Press releases issued prior to July 11 which ap-
pear in this issue of the Bulletin are Nos. 343 of
June 10, 394 and 402 of June 28, 408 of June 30, 415
and 417 of July 1, and 419, 422, and 423 of July 7.
Subject
Atoms-for-peace agreement with Thai-
land.
UNESCO conference.
Note to U.S.S.R. concerning Pravda
correspondent.
Agricultural group leaves for U.S.S.R.
Dulles : departure for Geneva.
Holland : testimony on Panama treaty.
Jones appointment (rewrite).
Agreement with Belgium on forces in
Korea.
Randall designation (rewrite).
*Not printed.
tHeld for a later issue of the Bulletin.
No.
Date
*426
7/11
427
7/11
42S
'7/11
429
7/12
430
7/13
t431
7/15
432
7/15
t433
7/15
434
7/15
U. 5. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 19BB
United States
Government Printing Office
DIVISION OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS
Washington 25, D. C.
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE TO AVOID
PAYMENT OF POSTAGE, $300
IGPO)
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
the
Department
of
State
The United States and Germany: 1945-1955
Order Form
Voi Supt. of Documents
Govt. Printing Office
Washington 25, D.C.
Enclosed find:
$-
Publication 5827
25 cents
The story of the shaping of American policy toward Germany
during the 10 years which culminated in Germany's return to
the community of free nations is told officially for the first time
in The United States and Germany: 1945-1955, a 56-page illus-
trated pamphlet.
Ways and means of attaining U.S. goals in Germany have
changed since 1945, the booklet notes, "but so have we changed,
and so has Germany, and so has the world." To appreciate the
significance of this change, it continues, "it is necessary to look
back to the beginning of the postwar decade and note the factors
that have influenced our course."
Much of the story is appropriately concerned with the im-
portant developments of 1954-55. Of these the document
says: "The events of the past year more than any other have
tested the validity of our policy. In spite of obstacles and re-
verses, our policy for Germany has achieved in a decade what
we once believed would require a full generation. A new
Germany, risen from the ruins of Nazi Germany, has reached
the status of well-earned sovereignty and acceptance as an equal
into the partnership of free nations."
Copies of The United States and Germany: 1945-1955 may be
purchased for 25 cents from the Superintendent of Documents,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C.
(cash, cheek, or
money order).
Please send me copies of The United States and Germany: 1945-
1955.
Name:
Street Address:
City, Zone, and State:
rve/
twh
&
Vol. XXXIII, No. 840
August 1, 1955
^ie NT o*.
MEETING OF HEADS OF GOVERNMENT AT
GENEVA
Statements by the President 171
Directive to Foreign Ministers 176
BASIC ISSUES IN THE NATO STATUS OF FORCES
AGREEMENT • Statement by Deputy Under Secretary
Murphy 178
TREATY OF MUTUAL UNDERSTANDING AND CO-
OPERATION WITH PANAMA • Statement by Assist-
ant Secretary Holland . 185
AGREEMENT ON PARTICIPATION OF BELGIAN
FORCES IN KOREA (text) 189
U.N. COMMAND CITES VIOLATIONS OF KOREAN
ARMISTICE AGREEMENT • Statement by Maj. Gen.
Harlan C. Parks 191
SECOND PROGRESS REPORT ON THE AGRICUL-
TURAL TRADE DEVELOPMENT AND ASSIST-
ANCE ACT 197
THE UNITED NATIONS AND EQUALITY FOR
WOMEN • Article by Mrs. Lorena B. Hahn 206
For index see inside back cover
■ary
:i:;win<,.: V ! .m ,,, Documents
AUG 2 6 1955
'•»»«» o*
Me Qjefuwtmewt *>f £/Lte JOllllGllIl
Vol. XXXIII, No. 840 • Publication 5940
August 1, 1955
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents
U.S. Government Printing Office
Washington 25, D.C.
Price:
52 Issues, domestic $7.50, foreign $10.25
Single copy, 20 cents
The printing of this publication has
been approved by the Director of the
Bureau of the Budget (January 19, 1955).
Note: Contents of this publication are not
copyrighted and Items contained herein may
be reprinted. Citation of the Department
o? State Bulletin as the source will be
appreciated.
The Department of State BULLETIN,
a weekly publication issued by the
Public Services Division, provides the
public and interested agencies of
the Government with information on
developments in the field of foreign
relations and on the work of the De-
partment of State and the Foreign
Service. The BULLETIN includes
selected press releases on foreign pol-
icy, issued by the White House and
the Department, and statements and
addresses made by the President and
by the Secretary of State and other
officers of the Department, as tvell as
special articles on various phases of
international affairs and the func-
tions of the Department. Informa-
tion is included concerning treaties
and international agreements to
which the United States is or may
become a party and treaties of gen-
eral international interest.
Publications of the Department, as
well as legislative material in the field
of international relations, are listed
currently.
Meeting of Heads of Government at Geneva
Following are the texts of four statements by
President Eisenhower at the Heads of Govern-
ment meeting at Geneva, Switzerland, July 18-23,
and the directive handed to the Big Four Foreign
Ministers on the closing day of the Geneva
meeting.
OPENING STATEMENT, JULY 18
Press release 435 dated July 18
We meet here for a simple purpose. We have
come to find a basis for accommodation which will
make life safer and happier not only for the
nations we represent but for people elsewhere.
We are here in response to a universal urge,
recognized by Premier Bulganin in his speech of
July 15, that the political leaders of our great
countries find a path to peace. We cannot expect
here, in the few hours of a few days, to solve all
the problems of all the world that need to be
solved. Indeed, the four of us meeting here have
no authority from others that could justify us
even in attempting that. The roots of many of
these problems are buried deep in war, conflicts,
and history. They are made even more difficult
by the differences in governmental ideologies and
ambitions. Manifestly it is out of the question in
the short time available to the Heads of Govern-
ment meeting here to trace out the causes and
origins of these problems and to devise agree-
ments that could, with complete fairness to all,
eliminate them.
Nevertheless, we can, perhaps, create a new
spirit that will make possible future solutions of
problems which are within our responsibilities.
And, equally important, we can try to take here
and now at Geneva the first steps on a new road
to a just and durable peace.
The problems that concern us are not inherently
insoluble. Of course, they are difficult; but their
solution is not beyond the wisdom of man. They
seem insoluble under conditions of fear, distrust,
and even hostility, where every move is weighed
in terms of whether it will help or weaken a
potential enemy. If those conditions can be
changed, then much can be done. Under such cir-
cumstances I am confident that at a later stage our
Foreign Ministers will be able to carry on from
where we leave off to find, either by themselves or
with others, solutions to our problems.
No doubt there are among our nations philo-
sophical convictions which are in many respects
irreconcilable. Nothing that we can say or do
here will change that fact. However, it is not
always necessary that people should think alike
and believe alike before they can work together.
The essential thing is that none should attempt by
force or trickery to make his beliefs prevail and
thus to impose his system on the unwilling.
The new approach we of this conference should
seek cannot be found merely by talking in terms
of abstractions and generalities. It is necessary
that we talk frankly about the concrete problems
which create tension between us and about the
way to begin in solving them.
As a preface, may I indicate some of the issues
I think we should discuss.
The German Question
First is the problem of unifying Germany and
forming an all-German government based on free
elections. Ten years have passed since the Ger-
man armistice, and Germany is still divided.
That division does a grievous wrong to a people
which is entitled, like any other, to pursue to-
gether a common destiny. While that division
continues, it creates a basic source of instability in
Europe. Our talk of peace has little meaning if
at the same time we perpetuate conditions en-
dangering the peace. Toward Germans, the four
of us bear special responsibilities. While any con-
clusions we reach would be invalid unless sup-
ported by majority opinion in Germany, this prob-
August 1, 1955
171
lem should be a topic for our meeting here. Must
we not consider ways to solve it promptly and
justly?
In the interest of enduring peace, our solution
should take account of the legitimate security
interests of all concerned. That is why we insist
a united Germany is entitled, at its choice, to
exercise its inherent right of collective self-de-
fense. By the same token, we are ready to take
account of legitimate security interests of the
Soviet Union. The Paris agreements contain
many provisions which serve this purpose. But
we are quite ready to consider further reciprocal
safeguards which are reasonable and practical and
compatible with the security of all concerned.
On a broader plane, there is the problem of re-
specting the right of peoples to choose the form of
government under which they will live; and of
restoring sovereign rights and self-government to
those who have been deprived of them. The
American people feel strongly that certain peoples
of Eastern Europe, many with a long and proud
record of national existence, have not yet been
given the benefit of this pledge of our United
Nations wartime declaration, reinforced by other
wartime agreements.
There is the problem of communication and
human contacts as among our peoples. We
frankly fear the consequences of a situation where
whole peoples are isolated from the outside world.
The American people want to be friends with the
Soviet peoples. There are no natural differences
between our peoples or our nations. There are
no territorial conflicts or commercial rivalries.
Historically, our two countries have always been
at peace. But friendly understanding between
peoples does not readily develop when there are
artificial barriers such as now interfere with com-
munication. It is time that all curtains, whether
of guns or laws or regulations, should begin to
come down. But this can only be done in an at-
mosphere of mutual respect and confidence.
There is the problem of international commu-
nism. For 38 years now its activities have dis-
turbed relations between other nations and the
Soviet Union. Its activities are not confined to
efforts to persuade. It seeks throughout the world
to subvert lawful governments and to subject na-
tions to an alien domination. We cannot ignore
the distrust created by the support of such activi-
ties. In my nation and elsewhere it adds to dis-
trust and therefore to international tension.
Armaments
Finally, there is the overriding problem of
armament. This is at once a result and a cause of
existing tension and distrust. Contrary to a basic
purpose of the United Nations Charter, arma-
ments now divert much of men's effort from crea-
tive to nonproductive uses. We would all like to
end that. But apparently none dares to do so
because of fear of attack.
Surprise attack has a capacity for destruction
far beyond anything which man has yet known.
So each of us deems it vital that there should be
means to deter such attack. Perhaps, therefore, we
should consider whether the problem of limitation
of armament may not best be approached by seek-
ing — as a first step — dependable ways to super-
vise and inspect military establishments, so that
there can be no frightful surprises, whether by
sudden attack or by secret violation of agreed re-
strictions. In this field nothing is more important
than that we explore together the challenging and
central problem of effective mutual inspection.
Such a system is the foundation for real disarma-
ment.
As we think of this problem of armament, we
need to remember that the present burden of costly
armaments not only deprives our own people of
higher living standards, but it also denies the peo-
ples of underdeveloped areas of resources which
would improve their lot. These areas contain
much of the world's population and many nations
now emerging for the first time into political inde-
pendence. They are grappling with the urgent
problem of economic growth. Normally they
would receive assistance, particularly for capital
development, from the more developed nations of
the world. However, that normal process is
gravely retarded by the fact that the more devel-
oped industrial countries are dedicating so much
of their productive effort to armament. Arma-
ment reduction would and should insure that part
of the savings would flow into the less developed
areas of the world to assist their economic develop-
ment.
Atoms for Peace
In addition, we must press forward in develop-
ing the use of atomic energy for constructive pur-
poses. We regret that the Soviet Union has never
accepted our proposal of December 1953 that na-
tions possessing stockpiles of fissionable material
172
Department of Sfafe Bulletin
should join to contribute to a "world bank" so as,
in steadily increasing measure, to substitute co-
operation in human welfare for competition in
means of human destruction. We still believe that
if the Soviet Union would, according to its ability,
contribute to this great project, that act would im-
prove the international climate.
In this first statement of the conference, I have
indicated very briefly some of the problems that
weigh upon my mind and upon the people of the
United States and where solution is largely within
the competence of the four of us. As our work
here progresses, I hope that all of us will have sug-
gestions as to how we might promote the search for
the solution of these problems.
Perhaps it would be well if each of us would in
turn give a similar indication of his country's
views. Then we can quickly see the scope of the
matters which it might be useful to discuss here
and arrange our time accordingly.
Let me repeat, I trust that we are not here
merely to catalog our differences. We are not
here to repeat the same dreary exercises that have
characterized most of our negotiations of the past
10 years. We are here in response to the peaceful
aspirations of mankind to start the kind of discus-
sions which will inject a new spirit into our
diplomacy and to launch fresh negotiations under
conditions of good augury.
In that way, and perhaps only in that way, can
our meeting, necessarily brief, serve to generate
and put in motion the new forces needed to set us
truly on the path to peace. For this I am sure all
humanity will devoutly pray.
STATEMENT ON DISARMAMENT, JULY 21
White House Office (Geneva) press release dated July 21
Disarmament is one of the most important sub-
jects on our agenda. It is also extremely diffi-
cult. In recent years the scientists have dis-
covered methods of making weapons many, many
times more destructive of opposing armed forces —
but also of homes and industries and lives — than
ever known or even imagined before. These same
scientific discoveries have made much more com-
plex the problems of limitation and control and
reduction of armament.
After our victory as allies in World War II, my
country rapidly disarmed. Within a few years
our armament was at a very low level. Then events
occurred beyond our borders which caused us to
realize that we had disarmed too much. For our
own security and to safeguard peace we needed
greater strength. Therefore we proceeded to re-
arm and to associate with others in a partnership
for peace and for mutual security.
The American people are determined to main-
tain and, if necessary, increase this armed strength
for as long a period as is necessary to safeguard
peace and to maintain our security.
But we know that a mutually dependable system
for less armament on the part of all nations would
be a better way to safeguard peace and to main-
tain our security.
It would ease the fears of war in the anxious
hearts of people everywhere. It would lighten
the burdens upon the backs of the people. It
would make it possible for every nation, great and
small, developed and less developed, to advance
the standards of living of its people, to attain bet-
ter food and clothing and shelter, more of educa-
tion and larger enjoyment of life.
Therefore the United States Government is pre-
pared to enter into a sound and reliable agreement
making possible the reduction of armament. I
have directed that an intensive and thorough study
of this subject be made within our own Govern-
ment. From these studies, which are continuing,
a very important principle is emerging to which I
referred in my opening statement on Monday.
Adequate Inspection and Reporting Essential
No sound and reliable agreement can be made
unless it is completely covered by an inspection
and reporting system adequate to support every
portion of the agreement. The lessons of history
teach us that disarmament agreements without
adequate reciprocal inspection increase the dangers
of war and do not brighten the prospects of peace.
Thus it is my view that the priority attention of
our combined study of disarmament should be
upon the subject of inspection and reporting.
Questions suggest themselves.
How effective an inspection system can be de-
signed which would be mutually and reciprocally
acceptable within our countries and the other
nations of the world ? How would such a system
operate? What could it accomplish? Is cer-
tainty against surprise aggression attainable by
inspection? Could violations be discovered
promptly and effectively counteracted?
August 1, 1955
173
We have not as yet been able to discover any
scientific or other inspection method which would
make certain of the elimination of nuclear weap-
ons. So far as we are aware no other nation
has made such a discovery. Our study of this
problem is continuing. We have not as yet been
able to discover any accounting or other inspection
method of being certain of the true budgetary facts
of total expenditures for armament. Our study
of this problem is continuing. We by no means
exclude the possibility of finding useful checks in
these fields.
As you can see from these statements, it is our
impression that many past proposals of disarma-
ment are more sweeping than can be insured by
effective inspection.
Gentlemen, since I have been working on this
memorandum to present to this conference, I
have been searching my heart and mind for some-
thing that I could say here that could convince
everyone of the great sincerity of the United
States in approaching this problem of disarma-
ment. I should address myself for a moment
principally to the delegates from the Soviet Union,
because our two great countries admittedly possess
new and terrible weapons in quantities which do
give rise in other parts of the world, or recipro-
cally, to the fears and dangers of surprise attack.
U.S. Proposal
I propose, therefore, that we take a practical
step, that we begin an arrangement, very quickly,
as between ourselves — immediately. These steps
would include :
To give to each other a complete blueprint of
our military establishments, from beginning to
end, from one end of our countries to the other;
lay out the establishments and provide the blue-
prints to each other.
Next, to provide within our countries facilities
for aerial photography to the other country — we
to provide you the facilities within our country,
ample facilities for aerial reconnaissance, where
you can make all the pictures you choose and take
them to your own country to study ; you to provide
exactly the same facilities for us and we to make
these examinations — and by this step to convince
the world that we are providing as between our-
selves against the possibility of great surprise
attack, thus lessening danger and relaxing tension.
Likewise we will make more easily attainable a
comprehensive and effective system of inspection
and disarmament, because what I propose, I assure
you, would be but a beginning.
Now from my statements I believe you will
anticipate my suggestion. It is that we instruct
our representatives in the Subcommittee on Dis-
armament in discharge of their mandate from the
United Nations to give priority effort to the study
of inspection and reporting. Such a study could
well include a step-by-step testing of inspection
and reporting methods.
The United States is ready to proceed in the
study and testing of a reliable system of inspec-
tions and reporting and, when that system is
proved, then to reduce armaments with all others
to the extent that the system will provide assured
results. The successful working out of such a
system would do much to develop the mutual con-
fidence which will open wide the avenues of prog-
ress for all our peoples.
The quest for peace is the statesman's most ex-
acting duty. Security of the nation entrusted to
his care is his greatest responsibility. Practical
progress to lasting peace is his fondest hope. Yet
in pursuit of his hope he must not betray the trust
placed in him as guardian of the people's security.
A sound peace — with security, justice, well-being,
and freedom for the people of the world — can be
achieved, but only by patiently and thoughtfully
followinc a hard and sure and tested road.
STATEMENT ON EAST-WEST CONTACTS,
JULY 22
White House Office (Geneva) press release dated July 22
According to the adopted agenda, today we meet
to discuss methods of normalizing and increasing
the contacts between our nations in many fields. I
am heartened by the deep interest in this question,
which interest implies a common purpose to under-
stand each other better. Unfortunately there exist
unnecessary restrictions on the flow between us of
ideas, of things, and of people.
Like other questions we have considered during
the past 4 days, this one cannot be considered in-
dependently or in isolation. All are related by
their direct importance to the general objective of
lessening world fears and tensions.
To help achieve the goal of peace based on justice
and right and mutual understanding, there are cer-
tain concrete steps that could be taken :
174
Department of State Bulletin
( 1 ) To lower the barriers which now impede the
interchange of information and ideas between our
peoples.
(2) To lower the barriers which now impede the
opportunities of people to travel anywhere in the
world for peaceful, friendly purposes, so that all
will have a chance to know each other face to face.
(3) To create conditions which will encourage
nations to increase the exchange of peaceful goods
throughout the world.
Success in these endeavors should improve the
conditions of life for all our citizens and elsewhere
in the world. By helping eliminate poverty and
ignorance, we can take another step in progress
toward peace.
Communications and Travel
^Restrictions on communications of all kinds, in-
cluding radio and travel, existing in extreme form
in some places, have operated as causes of mutual
distrust. In America, the fervent belief in free-
dom of thought, of expression, and of movement
is a vital part of our heritage. Yet during these
past 10 years even we have felt compelled, in the
protection of our own interests, to place some
restrictions upon the movement of persons and
communications across our national frontiers.
This conference has the opportunity, I believe,
to initiate concrete steps to permit the breaking
down of both mild and severe barriers to mutual
understanding and trust.
Trade
Now I should like to turn to the question of
trade. I assume that each of us here is dedicated
to the improvement of the conditions of life of
our own citizens. Trade in peaceful goods is an
important factor in achieving this goal. If trade
is to reach its maximum capability in this regard,
it must be both voluminous and worldwide.
The United Nations has properly been con-
cerned in making available to the people of the
underdeveloped areas modern technology and
managerial abilities, as well as capital and credit.
My country not only supports these efforts but has
undertaken parallel projects outside the United
Nations.
Potential of Atomic Science
In this connection the new atomic science pos-
sesses a tremendous potential for helping raise
the standards of living and providing greater
opportunity for all the world. Worldwide inter-
est in overcoming poverty and ignorance is grow-
ing by leaps and bounds, and each of the great
nations should do its utmost to assist in this
development.
As a result new desires, new requirements, new
aspirations are emerging almost everywhere as
man climbs the upward path of his destiny. Most
encouraging of all is the evidence that, after cen-
turies of fatalism and resignation, the hopeless of
the world are beginning to hope.
But regardless of the results achieved through
the United Nations effort or the individual efforts
of helpful nations, trade remains the indispen-
sable arterial system of a flourishing world
prosperity. If we could create conditions in
which unnecessary restrictions on trade would be
progressively eliminated and under which there
would be free and friendly exchange of ideas and
of people, we should have done much to chart the
paths toward the objectives we commonly seek.
By working together toward all these goals, we
can do much to transform this century of recur-
ring conflict into a century of enduring and
invigorating peace. This, I assure you, the
United States of America devoutly desires — as I
know all of us do.
CLOSING STATEMENT, JULY 23
White House Office (Geneva) press release dated July 23
I welcome and warmly reciprocate the spirit of
friendliness and good intent that have character-
ized the statements of the two preceding speakers
[Prime Ministers Eden and Bulganin], but I do
hope that my silence respecting certain of the
statements made by the immediately preceding
speaker [Bulganin] will not by any means be in-
terpreted as acquiescence on my part. Far from
it.
But it has seemed to me that in the closing
minutes of this conference there is no necessity
for me to announce to this conference and to the
world the United States position on the important
questions we have discussed. These I hope and
believe have already been made clear. There-
fore, it has not seemed particularly fitting once
more to recite them in detail. Bather I content
myself with some reflections on our work of the
past week and an expression of some hopes for the
future.
August J, J 955
175
Followthrough Will Be Decisive
This has been an historic meeting. It has been
on the whole a good week. But only history will
tell the true worth and real values of our session
together. The followthrough from this beginning
by our respective governments will be decisive in
the measure of this conference.
We have talked over plainly a number of the
most difficult and perplexing questions affecting
our several peoples and indeed the peoples of the
entire world. We did not come here to reach final
solutions. We came to see if we might together
find the path that would lead to solutions and
would brighten the prospects of world peace.
In this final hour of our assembly, it is my
judgment that the prospects of a lasting peace
with justice, well-being, and broader freedom are
brighter. The dangers of the overwhelming
tragedy of modern war are less.
The work of our Foreign Ministers as they
strive to implement our directives will be of great
importance, perhaps of even more than what we
have done here. Theirs is the task, reflecting the
substantive policies of their governments, to reach
agreement on courses of action which we here
could discuss only in broad terms. I know we all
wish them well. I trust we will all support the
necessary adjustments which they may find our
governments must make if we are to resolve our
differences in these matters.
The Hope of All Mankind
If our peoples, in the months and years ahead,
broaden their knowledge and their understanding
of each other, as we, during this week, have broad-
ened our knowledge of each other, further agree-
ment between our governments may be facilitated.
May this occur in a spirit of justice. May it
result in improved well-being, greater freedom,
and less of fear or suffering or distress for man-
kind. May it be marked by more of good will
among men. These days will then indeed be ever
remembered.
I came to Geneva because I believe mankind
longs for freedom from war and rumors of war.
I came here because of my lasting faith in the
decent instincts and good sense of the people who
populate this world of ours. I shall return home
tonight with these convictions unshaken and with
the prayer that the hope of mankind will one day
be realized.
DIRECTIVE TO FOREIGN MINISTERS, JULY 23
The Heads of Government of France, the United
Kingdom, the U.S.S.R. and the U.S.A., guided by
the desire to contribute to the relaxation of inter-
national tension and to the consolidation of confi-
dence between states, instruct their Foreign Min-
isters to continue the consideration of the
following questions with regard to which an ex-
change of views has taken place at the Geneva
Conference, and to propose effective means for
their solution, taking account of the close link be-
tween the reunification of Germany and the prob-
lems of European security, and the fact that the
successful settlement of each of these problems
would serve the interests of consolidating peace.
1. European Security and Germany. For the
purpose of establishing European security with
due regard to the legitimate interests of all nations
and their inherent right to individual and collec-
tive self-defence, the Ministers are instructed to
consider various proposals to this end, including
the following: A security pact for Europe or for
a part of Europe, including provision for the as-
sumption by member nations of an obligation not
to resort to force and to deny assistance to an ag-
gressor; limitation, control, and inspection in re-
gard to armed forces and armaments; establish-
ment between East and West of a zone in which the
disposition of armed forces will be subject to
mutual agreement; and also to consider other
possible proposals pertaining to the solution of
this problem.
The Heads of Government, recognizing their
common responsibility for the settlement of the
German question and the re-unification of Ger-
many, have agreed the settlement of the German
question and the re-unification of Germany by
means of free elections shall be carried out in con-
formity with the national interests of the German
people and the interests of European security.
The Foreign Ministers will make whatever ar-
rangements they may consider desirable for the
participation of, or for consultation with, other
interested parties.
2. Disarmament
The Four Heads of Government,
Desirous of removing the threat of war and
lessening the burden of armaments,
Convinced of the necessity, for secure peace and
for the welfare of mankind, of achieving a system
176
Department of State Bulletin
for the control and reduction of all armaments and
armed forces under effective safeguards,
Recognizing that achievements in this field
would release vast material resources to be devoted
to the peaceful economic development of nations,
for raising, their well-being, as well as for assist-
ance to underdeveloped countries,
Agree :
( 1 ) for these purposes to work together to de-
velop an acceptable system for disarmament
through the Sub-Committee of the United Nations
Disarmament Commission ;
(2) to instruct their representatives in the Sub-
Committee in the discharge of their mandate from
the United Nations to take account in their work
of the views and proposals advanced by the Heads
of Government at this Conference;
(3) to propose that the next meeting of the
Sub-Committee be held on August 29, 1955, at New
York;
(4) to instruct the Foreign Ministers to take
note of the proceedings in the Disarmament Com-
mission, to take account of the views and proposals
advanced by the Heads of Government at this
Conference and to consider whether the four Gov-
ernments can take any further useful initiative in
the field of disarmament.
3. Development of Contacts between East and
West
The Foreign Ministers should by means of ex-
perts study measures, including those possible in
organs and agencies of the United Nations, which
could (a) bring about a progressive elimination of
barriers which interfere with free communications
and peaceful trade between people and (b) bring
about such freer contacts and exchanges as are to
the mutual advantage of the countries and peoples
concerned.
4. The Foreign Ministers of the Four Powers
will meet at Geneva during October to initiate
their consideration of these questions and to deter-
mine the organisation of their work.
Training Program for Paraguayan
Farm-to-Market Road
The Foreign Operations Administration an-
nounced on June 27 that it will provide $100,000
to train Paraguayans in the use and maintenance
of highway construction equipment as an adjunct
to the building of an important dry-weather road
through the rich agricultural Chaco area of west-
ern Paraguay. The funds will also be used for a
small amount of equipment.
The Chaco Eoad, to run a distance of 250 miles
between Asuncion and Filadelf ia, is the result of
an agreement between the Government of Para-
guay, Chaco ranchers, and Mennonite colonists to
provide $300,000 for its construction. Asuncion
is the capital of Paraguay ; Filadelfia, hub of the
Mennonite colonies. It is hoped the road eventu-
ally can be extended to Villa Montes, Bolivia, as
the first major access road between the two
countries.
The Mennonites, a denomination of evangelical
Protestant Christians who number about 12,000
in Paraguay, have successfully colonized a large
area in the interior during the past 25 years. They
have been so successful in their agricultural ven-
ture that the Government of Paraguay has au-
thorized them to take all possible steps to fulfill
goals set in a recent trade treaty with Bolivia.
The greatest problem confronting the Chaco
Mennonites is the lack of good transportation fa-
cilities to carry their products to market. Crops
must now be transported to Asuncion by a long
and devious route, by truck, railroad, and boat.
The service of an Foa engineer in the layout and
construction of the Chaco Road will be provided
under a cooperative agreement with the Para-
guayan Ministry of Public Works, Mennonite
authorities, and Chaco ranchers. Every 6 months
the supervising engineer, assisted by a group of
skilled Mennonites, will train a crew of workers,
who will then be assigned to roadbuilding projects
throughout Paraguay. Initial concentration will
be on the training of crews for the Chaco Road.
August 1, 7955
177
Basic Issues in the NATO Status of Forces Agreement
Statement by Deputy Under Secretary Murphy 1
Let me begin with a word about the testimony
which the committee has heard until now. The
Department of State — and I am sure I can speak
also for the Department of Defense in this re-
gard — fully sympathizes with the concern ex-
pressed by the witnesses who have appeared before
this committee. It is not, I trust, necessary to
say that this concern for the members of our forces
is fully shared by the Department of State and
by the Department of Defense. Their welfare,
indeed, is not only our concern but our responsi-
bility.
Unfortunately, some of the statements made
before this committee, and much that has ap-
peared in public print, reflect basic misconceptions
and misinformation. Our efforts to inform the
American people on the very important matter
with which this committee is concerned have ap-
parently been less successful than we had hoped.
It is for that reason that the Department is par-
ticularly grateful for the opportunity you have
offered this morning to inform and to explain to
this committee, and to the American people, what
are the basic issues involved, what is the legal
situation, and what are the facts.
By way of preface to my remarks, let me sum-
marize what we believe to be the situation. We
believe that the arrangements we do have are, in
general, the best that we can obtain today. We
believe that maintaining these arrangements,
while remaining ever on the alert to protect the
individual member of our forces against possible
1 Made before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs
on July 19 (press release 440) at public hearings on H. J.
Res. 309 and similar resolutions providing for revision of
the Nato Status of Forces Agreement and other agree-
ments relating to criminal jurisdiction over members of
the armed forces serving overseas.
error or abuse, is in the national interest. We be-
lieve that these arrangements are reasonable and
practicable and represent considerable concessions
to the viewpoint of the United States by our
allies. We believe that the experience to date —
which the representative of Defense is prepared
to summarize for you — shows that our status-of-
forces arrangements have worked in favor of the
members of our military forces abroad.
This experience, as you will see, shows how
small is the percentage of servicemen tried by
foreign courts and how few of these were actually
sent to jail. As to the handful who went to jail,
we can say this: In every one of these cases a
United States representative carefully followed
the trial. In not one of these cases do we believe
that an innocent man has gone to jail. In not one
of these cases did we feel warranted in objecting
that there had been an unfair trial. In not one
of these cases was there cruel or unusual punish-
ment. In not one of these cases can we say that
the sentence meted out was substantially more
severe than that which would probably have been
imposed by a United States court martial.
In the history of American treatymaking there
have been few agreements more carefully and
painstakingly negotiated than the Nato Status of
Forces Agreement. 2 There are few agreements
which have received more widespread support
from military and diplomatic officials familiar
with the circumstances. The terms of the agree-
ment were worked out by diplomatic and military
officials of two administrations. The treaty was
2 S. Exec. T, S2d Cong., 2d sess. For text, see Treaties
and Other International Acts Series 2846. For an
announcement of the signing of the treaty, see Bulletin
of July 2, 1951, p. 16.
178
Department of State Bulletin
presented to the Senate by President Eisenhower 3
and received his full support, as well as that of
Secretary Dulles, and Secretary Wilson, General
Bradley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,
General Kidgway, Supreme Allied Commander in
Europe, and Admiral McCormick, Supreme Allied
Commander in the Atlantic. In the Senate the
treaty received careful consideration, much of it
centering on the issue of criminal jurisdiction with
which you are now concerned. The Senate ap-
proved the treaty by a 72-15 vote. Among its
supporters were Senator Knowland, Senator Taf t,
Senator George, and Senator Johnson. Yet there
is today a certain amount of confusion concerning
the meaning of the status-of- forces treaty.
Background of Agreement
Earlier in the hearings members of this com-
mittee expressed an interest in how the Nato
status-of-forces treaty came about. When the
United States decided that the defense of this
country and of the free world required the sta-
tioning of American forces on foreign soil, we
were concerned to assure these forces the maximum
protection possible. Recognizing that, unless
there were agreements with the governments con-
cerned, our troops might be subjected to local
jurisdiction for all kinds of offenses, even those
committed while the serviceman was on duty,
bilateral arrangements were negotiated. These
were interim arrangements in the form of execu-
tive agreements, varying from country to country.
The lack of uniformity and the interim character
of the arrangements raised problems in various
countries. When the North Atlantic Treaty came
into force and an integrated Western defense was
begun, it became clear that a more formal and
more permanent definition of status was neces-
sary. Everyone agreed that it should be arrived
at on a uniform and multilateral basis. It was
also necessary to deal with many other subjects,
such as travel, customs, taxes, civil claims, etc.
( In the Nato status-of-forces treaty the article on
criminal law is only 1 of 20.)
The status of forces of one friendly power in
the country of another in time of peace had already
been the subject of negotiation among the coun-
tries of Europe. The Brussels Agreement of 1949
3 For statements in support of the agreement at the time
of its submission to the Senate, see ibid., Apr. 27, 1953,
p. 628.
grovemins: the status of forces of Western Union
powers had established a precedent which the Eu-
ropean countries thought should be continued in
the Nato framework. This became the basis for
study, but the United States sought to assure
greater protections for our servicemen.
The countries involved in the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization believe that their system of
justice is civilized and fair. They were not will-
ing to recognize an extralegal status for forces of
other friendly states. Although some of them
feel as strongly as we do about protecting the
members of their forces, they were willing, in the
common defense, to send forces to friendly states,
recognizing that they would be subject to the juris-
diction of those states, within certain limitations
to be established in the status-of-forces treaty, and
they believed that the other Nato members should
be willing to do likewise.
The United States sought to obtain for its forces
the maximum privileges and protection possible.
We sought and obtained more, in most countries,
than was granted by the interim arrangements.
Of course, we could not ask, in a multilateral
agreement, for provisions which we were not pre-
pared to grant in the United States. We believe
that the Nato status-of-forces treaty was, and is, in
the circumstances the best possible multilateral
agreement obtainable.
One principal source of confusion about the
criminal jurisdiction provisions, I believe, is the
notion that the treaty gave away something — that
it surrendered certain rights and privileges to
which American servicemen would otherwise have
been entitled. Now this idea is simply not true.
It is without foundation. The contrary is true.
As Attorney General Brownell has testified, the
treaty gained certain important rights and privi-
leges for American servicemen abroad that they
would not otherwise possess. That was one of the
principal purposes of the treaty, and that has been
its principal effect.
The major criticism directed against the crim-
inal jurisdiction provisions of the treaty stems
from the fact that, under its terms, foreign law-
enforcement agencies retain a measure of jurisdic-
tion over American servicemen who are accused of
crimes. Somehow, the idea arose that the treaty
gave foreign governments this criminal jurisdic-
tion. This idea seems to be based on the false
premise that the soldiers of one country who are
stationed in another country normally remain
August J, 1955
179
under the exclusive jurisdiction of their com-
manders and are not subject to local laws. I
understand that certain American judicial opin-
ions have been cited to support this view.
Views of Justice Department
The committee will hear from the representative
of the Department of Justice. I should like,
nevertheless, to read the committee Attorney Gen-
eral Brownell's conclusions about the treaty. Be-
fore the Senate Foreign Relations Committee con-
sidering the treaty, he said, in part :
. . . we believe that this does not change the rule of
international law to the detriment of any American citizen.
Now our second conclusion is that the treaty affords to
our forces abroad more immunity from local criminal
jurisdiction than they would have in the absence of an
agreement.
Our third conclusion is that this treaty affords our
forces abroad more immunity than is afforded under the
agreements which we think are directly comparable.
And our final conclusion is that the treaty gives to the
members of our forces when they are to be tried in the
courts of the receiving state adequate safeguards in ac-
cordance with civilized standards of justice.
Even if the legal conclusions were disputable,
however, we cannot escape the hard facts. The
governments of allied countries — the govern-
ments directly concerned here — certainly do not
recognize legal doctrines like that suggested.
They are sovereign nations. As such, they have
criminal jurisdiction over every individual ac-
cused of offenses within their boundaries —
whether soldier or civilian, whether citizen or
alien — unless they voluntarily choose to waive
this jurisdiction. Under longstanding custom
they have waived it in the case of certain diplo-
matic officials. Under wartime conditions they
have sometimes waived it with respect to allied
military personnel. Under the Status of Forces
Agreement they have waived a considerable part
of their jurisdiction with respect to allied soldiers
stationed in their country in peacetime. But the
choice always lies with the sovereign host govern-
ment. If it does not waive its jurisdiction or
modify it, it retains jurisdiction, and this applies
to soldiers as well as to tourists and businessmen
who are visiting its country.
In the absence of the status-of-forces treaty or
other voluntary waiver, therefore, these govern-
ments would have the right to arrest and try any
American accused of criminal offenses within
their borders. If the treaty now existing should
be revoked, that is exactly the situation that
would immediately come into being. For this
reason, it is entirely incorrect to argue that, if we
got rid of the status-of-forces treaty, the rights
of American soldiers abroad would be restored.
As Attorney General Brownell said, without the
Nato agreement our forces would have much less
and would be worse off.
Now, in view of the fact that foreign govern-
ments normally have full jurisdiction over mili-
tary and civilian personnel within their bound-
aries, there are some who recognize that the treaty
has added substantially to the protection afforded
American servicemen but who nevertheless argue
that allied governments should have gone even
further than they did. They believe that the
United States Government, in return for assigning
soldiers, sailors, and airmen abroad, should de-
mand that allied governments completely sur-
render their criminal jurisdiction over these
troops. In effect, they seem to be saying that
American forces are sent abroad as a special favor
to allied nations and that these nations ought to be
willing to give up a part of their sovereign author-
ity in payment for this favor. If these govern-
ments are unwilling to do this, it is argued, the
United States should withdraw its troops.
NATO Forces and Collective Security
This argument raises the gravest issues of for-
eign policy and national security. This commit-
tee has by its action on legislation indicated its
understanding of the reasons for stationing Amer-
ican servicemen abroad and of the international
circumstances which make this action essential to
our national safety. Nevertheless, it may be use-
ful to review briefly some of the basic principles
upon which the Nato alliance is founded. The
Status of Forces Agreement can only be under-
stood within the context of the broader collective
security system of which it is a part.
This country long ago accepted the fact that the
only true security available in this modern world
is collective security. The Congress has demon-
strated time and again its recognition of this
proposition. We have entered alliances with many
countries throughout the world, not just to protect
other nations but also to protect ourselves. One
of the most important of these alliances is the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Our Nato
180
Department of State Bulletin
allies have raised sizable military forces and now
have more men under arms than we do. They are
producing military equipment and supplies in sig-
nificant quantities. They have provided many
important ports and bases for the common defense.
"While the United States Government has con-
tributed substantial amounts in money and equip-
ment to support their defense efforts, these govern-
ments are paying most of the cost themselves. As
a result they are supplying more military power
to supplement and reinforce American defense
efforts than we can find anywhere else in the world.
Nato represents our first line of defense, and the
degree of its effectiveness has a tremendous im-
pact upon the dependability of our own national
defense system. To put it simply, the success of
Nato may make the difference between war and
peace — may some day determine whether millions
of Americans will live or die.
U.S. Troops Indispensable to NATO
As part of our contribution to the Nato partner-
ship, we have stationed a sizable number of U.S.
military forces in Europe. While these forces are
a minority of the total, their presence is indis-
pensable to Nato. In political and psychological
terms their presence demonstrates our continuing
determination to participate actively in the Atlan-
tic defense system. In military terms they repre-
sent a body of trained and skilled manpower for
which no substitution from European sources is
practical. They operate ports and air bases and
other technical facilities which are vital to effec-
tive defense in modern warfare. Our allies want
these troops to stay in Europe. We recognize the
need to have them there. They are part of an
overall pattern of defense which could not be dis-
rupted without fatal injury to the entire structure.
The important point for us to remember is that
American troops are not in Europe as a favor to
our allies. Their principal purpose is to protect
the United States itself. They are there because
we know that we can get more total protection by
combining our strength with that of other nations
than by standing alone. They are there because we
want to prevent war altogether — to stop it before
it starts. And if war comes despite our best efforts
to prevent it, these military forces are in the place
where they can do the most good — where they can
help to halt an enemy attack and to retaliate with
immediate and devastating effect. No credence is
given today to the idea that American soldiers,
sailors, and airmen can best protect American cit-
izens by staying at home and waiting for an enemy
to strike the United States.
Let me repeat — American troops are not in al-
lied countries as a favor to our allies. We know
this, and our allies know it. It would be ridiculous
for us to try to pretend that our troops are there
just to help them. It is impossible for us to say,
"Put Americans above the law or we'll go home,"
because it is not in our own interest to go home,
any more than it is in their interest for us to go
home. Only one interest would be served by the
withdrawal of American forces from Europe, and
that is the interest of Communist imperialism.
The Communists themselves are well aware of
this fact. Most of you know, I am sure, that the
Communists have labored increasingly to get
American troops out of Europe. You will note
that one key element of most recent Soviet pro-
posals is to eliminate U.S. bases in Europe and
to get American troops out. Local Communist
parties are constantly carrying on propaganda
campaigns to convince the local population that
American soldiers should go home. They are con-
stantly trying to stir up trouble between our
troops and local citizens. They know that Euro-
peans have bad memories of previous military oc-
cupation, and so they try to pretend that our
troops are "occupation forces." To support this
theme, the Communists steadily criticize local offi-
cials for giving privileges to American troops and
argue loudly that the Status of Forces Agreement
has given away too much of the local government's
authority. Adding all these things together we
can see clearly that the withdrawal of American
forces from Europe is a major Communist objec-
tive, because they know that such action would
weaken American defense as well as European
defense.
In the context of the mutual defense program
conducted through Nato, I believe the Status of
Forces Agreement can be viewed in better perspec-
tive. Nato has not only led to the stationing of
American troops in Europe ; it has also made nec-
essary the stationing of troops from several Euro-
pean countries in other European countries. One
aspect of the Mutual Security Program involves
the assignment of thousands of allied servicemen
to the United States each year for special train-
ing. All these exchanges of military personnel
August 1, 1955
181
inevitably produce certain administrative and
personal problems. In wartime, most of these
problems seem relatively minor. When soldiers
are dying every day under enemy fire, there is
little tendency to worry very much about second-
ary sacrifices and inconveniences. In peacetime,
however, it is more difficult for people to accept
the necessity of these inconveniences. It is some-
times hard to realize the full importance of suc-
cess on our part in fighting the "cold war" — in
conducting a dynamic peace effort to prevent war.
Criminal Jurisdiction of Host Government
It is natural that we should try to minimize
the personal difficulties that result from the sta-
tioning of troops of certain Nato countries in
other Nato countries. One of the most thorny
problems is that of criminal jurisdiction. Under
normal circumstances, as we have seen, the sov-
ereign host government has criminal jurisdiction.
In the absence of waiver by the host country, mil-
itary personnel would be subject to local jurisdic-
tion, as are local citizens or visiting businessmen
or tourists. The United States Government be-
lieves that these military personnel deserve special
protection. Most allied governments agree with
this principle. During World War II, in fact,
there were various legislative enactments and spe-
cial agreements that provided special protection.
However, as the time for the expiration of these
wartime agreements drew near, it became neces-
sary for the Nato governments to work out new
arrangements which would afford protection to in-
dividual servicemen consistent with the sovereign
authority of the host countries. It is strangely
ironic that this effort should later have been in-
terpreted as a denial or surrender of American
rights, when in fact American servicemen have
gained substantial advantages.
Let's take a look at some of these advantages.
In the first place, the Status of Forces Agreement
provides that United States servicemen remain un-
der United States jurisdiction with respect to
offenses committed while on duty. In other words,
foreign governments have voluntarily limited
their jurisdiction to criminal offenses occurring
while soldiers are off duty, on leave, or a. w. o. 1.
President Eisenhower once addressed himself to
this important feature of the agreement. He said,
in effect, that he believed servicemen deserved
special treatment while carrying out their assign-
ments but that, when these servicemen were on
leave and were following personal interests, they
should be subject to the same basic responsibilities
as other citizens.
Next, even if a serviceman is accused of an of-
fense during his off-duty hours, United States au-
thorities have the right to request local law en-
forcement agencies to waive jurisdiction and turn
the man over to the United States military com-
manders for trial and punishment. The treaty
provides that the local authorities shall give sym-
pathetic consideration to such requests. As the
representative of the Department of Defense will
be prepared to testify, jurisdiction has been waived
voluntarily in the overwhelming majority of cases.
Finally, in those cases where the local authori-
ties believe they must retain criminal jurisdiction,
the Status of Forces Agreement guarantees cer-
tain basic rights to the American serviceman.
They are comparable to the safeguards which the
serviceman would enjoy in a United States court
martial. For example, he has the right to counsel.
He has the right to confrontation by witnesses.
He has the right to use of compulsory process for
the purpose of obtaining witnesses in his own
behalf. He has the right to contact United States
military authorities. He has the right to have
United States officials present at his trial when
rules of the court permit, and in practice a United
States representative has never been barred from
the trial. Attorney General Brownell has testified
that these provisions add up to "adequate safe-
guards in accordance with civilized standards of
justice." These and other rights would not neces-
sarily be available if the Status of Forces Agree-
ment did not exist.
Results of the Agreement
It has often been said that "the test of the
pudding is in the eating." I think all of you are
undoubtedly interested in knowing how the
agreement has worked out in actual practice. The
detailed information will be presented by the De-
partment of Defense. However, I should like to
summarize in general terms the results of the
agreement thus far.
In general, both the Department of State and
the Department of Defense agree that the status-
of-forces arrangements have worked unusually
well. This view is supported by the commanders
in the field. Some commanders apparently feel
182
Department of State Bulletin
that the local courts have actually been too lenient
on American offenders. As I have said, of the
very small number who were sentenced to prison
by a foreign court there was not a single case in
which we have a clear feeling that a court martial
would have given a lighter sentence than that im-
posed by the local court. There was not a single
case in which there was a basis for the United
States to protest that the safeguards assured by
the Status of Forces Agreement for a fair trial
were not met, or that there was any other unfair-
ness. There has been not a single instance of cruel
or unusual punishment. A United States repre-
sentative has been present at every one of the trials
in these cases.
Of the many American servicemen, military
employees, and dependents sent abroad, where the
Nato status-of -forces treaty applied, there have
been approximately 6,000 cases which fell within
the primary jurisdiction of the local courts. In
some 70 percent of these cases the local authorities
have either dropped the charges entirely or waived
jurisdiction voluntarily and have surrendered the
accused person to United States military authori-
ties. In the very large majority of the cases
where Americans have stood trials, the courts
have either found the accused innocent or have
only imposed a fine. Out of the many hundreds of
thousands of service personnel abroad, out of a
total of 6,000 cases, only 85 persons have been im-
prisoned by local authorities in Nato countries,
and, as of May 31, 1955, only 22 were actually in
prison in these countries. Most of these sentences
have been very short. The maximum sentence
thus far imposed is 5 years for highway robbery
with violence at night by two men against an old
taxi driver.
Offenses Arousing Strong Local Feeling
You will note from the figures mentioned that
local authorities have usually been quite willing to
grant waivers of jurisdiction. In many instances,
one might say, the cases for which we have been
unable to obtain waivers and which have led to
sentences of imprisonment have involved offenses
arousing strong local feeling. Even in these cases,
the courts have acted with moderation and have
often been criticized for doing so. A British
newspaper, for example, complained bitterly sev-
eral months ago that an American soldier nor-
mally gets fined 10 shillings for an offense which
would cause a local citizen to spend 6 months in
jail. I do not know whether this complaint is
justified, but I mention it to illustrate that there
are definitely two sides to this question. When
an American soldier assaults, robs, or murders a
local citizen, you have a political and emotional
problem on your hands that is not too easy to settle
unless it is handled in a spirit of justice and mutual
understanding.
I have concentrated on the Nato countries and
the Nato Status of Forces Agreement because of
the importance of Nato in our foreign policy, as
well as because the resolution introduced in the
House of ^Representatives also concentrated on the
Nato status-of-forces treaty. In fact, there are
more or less formal arrangements governing the
status of our forces wherever they are stationed.
Some of these agreements or arrangements must
remain confidential. Let me explain. These ar-
rangements are not classified at our request be-
cause of any desire by the executive branch to keep
something hidden. They are classified at the re-
quest of the other governments involved largely
because of the generosity of these arrangements to
our forces. We could not, of course, reveal a clas-
sified international agreement without the consent
of the other party. Nor is it in our interest to
publicize these favorable arrangements. To do
so would jeopardize the arrangements and render
it unlikely that our servicemen could continue to
enjoy the benefits which they confer. We can
assure the committee that the arrangements gen-
erally have worked no less favorably to the inter-
ests of our servicemen than the Nato Status of
Forces Agreement.
As to the experience in the non-NATO countries
generally, the Department of Defense will be able
to give you the figures and facts; in general, the
experience is the same as or, in some cases, even
better than in the Nato countries, both as regards
the high percentage of waivers and the fairness of
treatment.
Civilians Seldom Have Immunity
Questions have been raised before this com-
mittee about the diplomatic status of State
Department and other civilian officials. In the
first place, it should be made clear that the great
majority of State Department personnel overseas
do not have immunity from local criminal juris-
diction. On the contrary, most United States
August 7, J955
183
civilian officers and employees abroad, including
those of other governmental agencies as well as
the State Department, have neither immunity nor
the special guaranties provided United States
servicemen by the Status of Forces Agreement.
They are completely subject to local criminal
jurisdiction, whether on duty or off duty.
A small minority possesses diplomatic immu-
nity by long custom and tradition. This im-
munity is granted not for the advantage of the
individual but for the benefit of the government
he is representing, and the government can waive,
and has waived, the immunity. And our diplo-
matic personnel are often required to live and
work in hostile lands where immunity is essential
to their work and to their safety. This immunity
is enjoyed by a small number of people who, in
fact, represent their government, and military
officers who represent the United States (e. g., our
Maag [Military Assistance Advisory Group]
officers) also enjoy diplomatic status.
Incidentally, nobody has diplomatic immunity
except in the country to which he is accredited.
So, even Secretary Dulles does not strictly have
diplomatic immunity when he is abroad, since he
is not accredited to any of the governments. And
even an ambassador has diplomatic immunity
only where he is accredited, not when he is on
vacation in another country. A diplomatic pass-
port by itself gives no immunity from jurisdiction.
Theoretical Alternatives
As I see it, there are three theoretical alterna-
tives suggested, or implied, by those who attack
the treaty. None of them is good.
First, we might try to revoke the treaty. Even
if we were willing to ignore the solemn commit-
ment undertaken by the United States with the
overwhelming consent of the Senate, it should be
clear that revocation of the agreement — or de-
nouncing it — would not be an acceptable alterna-
tive. Ke vocation or denunciation would merely
leave foreign jurisdiction undiminished and re-
move the guaranties now assured to an individual
serviceman. I don't think anyone desires this
result.
The second alternative is to withdraw Ameri-
can forces from Nato. This action would make
no sense either in terms of our foreign policy or
our national defense. It would play into the
hands of the Communists and permit them to
achieve one of their most eagerly sought objec-
tives. It would gravely weaken Europe and
gravely weaken our own security. I think it
would be a catastrophe for free nations to wreck
their entire system of collective defense simply
because of their inability to agree on reasonable
arrangements for handling an admittedly difficult
legal and administrative problem. Nothing
could do more to justify the ancient Communist
theory that the free nations are incapable of long-
term cooperation and will eventually be divided
by conflicts among themselves. Nothing could do
more to free the Soviet empire from the fear that
any aggression on its part will be met by instan-
taneous retaliation — a fear that has served as a
powerful deterrent to Soviet aggression.
The third alternative, of course, would be to try
to negotiate a new agreement. Because of a wide-
spread feeling in many areas that allied authori-
ties have been excessively lenient toward Ameri-
cans, political pressures might cause a new agree-
ment to be considerably less favorable to United
States servicemen. In any event, it can be safely
predicted that a new agreement woidd not solve
the fundamental problem posed by the critics of
the present agreement — that allied governments
would not surrender all criminal jurisdiction over
American forces. For just a moment, let us look
at this problem from their viewpoint.
Our allies know, as we do, that the cold war may
continue for a long time. We all hope that we will
be able to maintain a collective defense system as
long as the threat exists. Could sovereign gov-
ernments permit United States armed forces to
remain "above the law" — to constitute a sort of
"state within a state" — for an indefinite period of
time?
As I have mentioned, these governments are
already under attack for special treatment given
to American servicemen. Their leaders are re-
sponsible to the people just as ours are and are
necessarily guided by similar political considera-
tions. Would they be able to sign and secure
ratification of a new agreement which would de-
prive local law enforcement authorities of all
power to deal with crimes committed by Ameri-
cans within their communities? I think not.
If American forces should be made completely
immune to local jurisdiction, or even if this im-
munity should be seriously proposed, we could be
sure that the Communist propagandists would
184
Department of State Bulletin
have a field day. Their phony claim that Ameri-
can troops are "occupation forces" would be given
color, and they would have vastly increased oppor-
tunities to nourish and exploit resentments among
the local population.
Reciprocity
We must also remember that this treaty pro-
vides for reciprocity in the treatment of service-
men. Countries other than the United States are
concerned, and it is essential that the rules which
apply to one nation should apply to all. While
the number of Nato military personnel stationed
in this country is comparatively small, it is doubt-
ful that our federal and state governments would
wish to surrender all criminal jurisdiction over
these visitors. The Senate Foreign Relations
Committee in recommending consent to ratifica-
tion of the Nato Status of Forces Agreement
agreed that the United States should not divest
itself entirely of jurisdiction over foreign service-
men in this country.
Question of Sovereignty
Finally, is it reasonable that any free nation
demand that its allies surrender a fundamental
aspect of their sovereignty as the price of co-
operation? We Americans and other Western
peoples have vigorously and justifiably criticized
the Soviet Union for reducing the nations of East-
ern Europe to the status of satellites. We do not
expect our allies to be satellites. None of these
countries would accept a satellite role.
The Status of Forces Agreement goes to the very
heart of American foreign policy. If American
troops were not needed in Europe, the Status of
Forces Agreement would not be necessary. In-
stead the troops would be brought home. Further-
more, if it were assumed that the Nato alliance is
unimportant — that this country could get along
without allies — no doubt the same conclusion
would be reached. We recognize that our troops
are in Europe to protect our own interests, that
the alliance is vital to world peace and the survival
of human freedom, and that we must work with
our allies on the basis of equality and mutual re-
spect. With that recognition the Status of Forces
Agreement can be understood as a reasonable and
intelligent effort to solve one of the inevitable
problems of international partnership.
August 1, 1955
352555 — 55 3
Treaty off Mutual Understanding
and Cooperation With Panama
Statement by Henry F. Holland
Assistant Secretary for Inter- American Affairs 1
The Treaty of Mutual Understanding and Co-
operation between the United States and Panama
and the accompanying Memorandum of Under-
standings Reached, both of which were signed at
Panama City on January 25, 1955, 2 resulted from
negotiations which were begun in September 1953
at the request of Panama.
The last revision of our treaty relations with
Panama relating to the construction and opera-
tion of the Panama Canal took the form of the
General Treaty of March 2, 1936. While that
treaty satisfied certain Panamanian aspirations
which had grown up over the years since the orig-
inal treaty of 1903, it failed to satisfy Panama's
desire that its commerce share more fully in the
benefits to be derived from the market in the
Canal Zone and from ships transitting the
Canal. However, local prosperity resulting from
United States wartime expenditures in that region
diminished the importance accorded these matters
during the war and the immediate postwar period.
As United States expenditures progressively
tapered off in the postwar period and Panama
began to encounter greater economic problems,
these requests for greater commercial advantages
were revived. Panama also took the position that
it would be equitable to accord her a greater direct
benefit from the Canal enterprise, in the form
of increased annuity payments.
Shortly after taking office in 1952, President
Jose Antonio Remon Cantera announced his in-
tention to seek United States agreement to a re-
view of treaty relations pertaining to the Canal.
In the spring of 1953 the United States agreed to
embark upon such discussions, which were begun
in Washington in September 1953, 3 on the basis of
a list of requests presented by Panama. At this
same time President Remon made a State visit to
Washington, at the conclusion of which Presidents
Eisenhower and Remon issued a joint statement
1 Made before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee
on July 15 (press release 431).
* For text of treaty and accompanying memorandum,
together with announcement of the signing, see Bulletin
of Feb. 7, 1955, p. 237.
3 Ibid., Sept. 28, 1953, p. 418.
185
setting forth the principles which were to guide
the subsequent negotiations. 4 The discussions
continued in Washington until August 1954, at
which time the Panamanian delegation returned
to Panama to consult with their Government with
regard to the positions expressed by the United
States on the various Panamanian requests. Pres-
ident Eisenhower then informed President Remon
by letter of those matters on which the United
States was prepared to take affirmative action and
listed certain requests on the part of the United
States which, taken together, formed the basis on
which the United States was willing to formulate
agreements. The Panamanian President indi-
cated that his Government was disposed to pro-
ceed to the drafting of agreements on the basis of
President Eisenhower's communication, and
drafting negotiations were begun in Panama in
September. Final texts were agreed to in De-
cember, and the signing of the official texts took
place in Panama January 25, 1955.
These negotiations, in all phases, were carried
on in close consultation with the Department of
Defense and the Governor of the Panama Canal
Zone, as well as other agencies of the Government
which were interested in certain of the matters
under consideration. The agreements which are
now before the Senate are supported by all the
executive agencies whose respective areas of re-
sponsibility are touched upon by provisions of the
agreements.
Development of Panamanian Economy
In a general way, I would say to the committee
that our consideration of the Panamanian pro-
posals was based on most careful analysis and
study of each individual problem. We adopted
the general principle, in considering these pro-
posals, that it was to the interest of the United
States to assist Panama to develop its economy so
that Panama will be less dependent on the Canal
as such as a major source of income, so long as
any arrangements in this regard would not con-
flict with the essential interests of the United
States and those of individuals resident in the
Zone. It was possible to take a number of steps
of this nature in the hope of building greater
economic and political stability in this area so
vital to us. On the other hand, Panama made a
' Ibid., Oct. 12, 1953, p. 487.
number of requests which, if accepted, might have
weakened the jurisdictional position of the United
States in the Canal Zone, or might have accorded
Panama a special position in economic relations
with the United States or required the United
States to assume financial obligations in matters
for which the United States was not prepared to
accept responsibility. The United States could
not favorably consider these requests.
The United States, for its part, obtained certain
concessions which are beneficial to the United
States in the discharge of its responsibilities in
the Canal Zone.
A detailed analysis of the provisions of the
agreements will be found in the memorandum of
the Secretary of State to the President dated May
5, 1955, which was transmitted to the Senate as
an enclosure to the President's letter of May 9,
1955. 5 In view of the Secretary's explanation of
the provisions of the agreements set forth in his
memorandum, it would be repetitious for me to
go into the background of each provision in this
presentation. These agreements cover such a wide
range of subject matter, however, that I think it
might be helpful to review with you some of their
more important provisions.
Increased Annuity to Panama
Article I of the treaty provides for an increase
in the annuity paid to Panama for our rights in
the Canal Zone from the present $430,000 to
$1,930,000. Panama's request for an increased
annuity became the key issue in the negotiations.
A mutually satisfactory resolution of this issue
was indispensable to the successful conclusion of
the negotiations and to bringing about greater
harmony in relations between the two countries.
It was felt that while no legal obligation existed
an increase in the annuity was justified, bearing
in mind the rights, powers, and privileges granted
to the United States in the Zone and their stra-
tegic and commercial value to the United States.
The offer of an increased annuity was made con-
ditional upon Panama's accepting language, in-
serted in the preamble and in article I, designed to
safeguard the rights and jurisdictional position
of the United States in the Zone, This language
provides express recognition that the provisions
of the 1903 Convention, the 1936 General Treaty,
and the present treaty may be modified only by
' S. Exec. F, 84th Cong., 1st sess.
186
Department of State Bulletin
mutual consent; and both parties recognize the
absence of any obligation on the part of either
party to alter the amount of the annuity.
Article II of the treaty enables the Republic
of Panama to levy income taxes on Panamanian
citizens employed by Canal Zone agencies, irre-
spective of their place of residence, and citizens
of third countries so employed who reside in ter-
ritory under the jurisdiction of Panama. United
States citizens and members of the Armed Forces
(irrespective of nationality) who are employed
by Canal Zone agencies are exempt from Pana-
manian income tax regardless of their place of
residence.
Panama has been precluded from such taxation
by article X of the 1903 Convention. Our agree-
ment to such taxation expresses a principle which
is recognized in United States tax legislation that
a government may impose taxes on its citizens
wherever resident and on noncitizens who actually
reside within its jurisdiction. Panama's request
for permission to tax these categories of Canal
Zone employees was agreed to since the present
situation with respect to their taxation is con-
sidered inequitable and to serve no real interest
of the United States. It is provided that any such
tax imposed by Panama shall be on a nondiscrimi-
natory basis.
Under article V of the treaty the United States
agrees, subject to enactment of legislation by the
United States Congress, to transfer to Panama
certain lands, with improvements thereon, in ter-
ritory under Panamanian jurisdiction and in the
Canal Zone when and as determined by the United
States to be no longer needed for United States
Government purposes. This agreement accords
with our policy of not retaining properties within
Panamanian jurisdiction past the time when they
are in fact required for Canal purposes. The
lands and improvements to which this article re-
fers, as well as the conditions governing the trans-
fers, are set forth in item 2 of the Memorandum
of Understandings Reached.
In article VIII of the treaty Panama agrees to
reserve an area of some 19,000 acres in the Rio
Hato region for the exclusive use of the United
States Armed Forces for maneuvers and military
training for a period of 15 years, without cost to
the United States, subject to extension as may be
agreed by the two Governments. Panama also
has agreed in the memorandum to lease to the
United States for 99 years, for a nominal con-
sideration, two parcels of land contiguous to the
United States Embassy residence and to preserve
permanently the area in front of the Embassy
office building as a park.
In article IX Panama waives its right under
article XIX of the 1903 Convention to free trans-
portation over the Panama Railroad for persons
in its service, and in article X Panama waives
certain rights under the 1903 Convention in order
to enable the United States in its discretion to
prohibit or restrict certain specified bus and truck
traffic on a possible new strategic highway across
the Isthmus within the Zone, in the event of the
discontinuance of the Panama Railroad and the
construction of the road.
Several of the provisions in both the treaty and
the memorandum were negotiated for the purpose
of affording Panama greater commercial oppor-
tunities in the Canal Zone subject, where deemed
necessary, to appropriate competitive safeguards.
I refer in this connection to article XII of the
treaty and items 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of the United
States undertakings in the memorandum. Sub-
ject to specified conditions and qualifications, we
propose to exempt Panamanian products from the
Buy American Act when purchased for use in the
Zone; to withdraw from the business of selling
supplies to ships in the Zone, with certain excep-
tions; to withdraw service and commissary privi-
leges and free import privileges from non-United
States citizen Zone employees resident in Panama ;
to afford the economy of Panama full opportunity
to compete for purchases by Canal Zone agencies ;
to import merchandise for resale in the Zone from
either United States or Panamanian sources inso-
far as feasible; and to withdraw from certain
manufacturing and processing activities in the
Zone. The conditions to which these items are
subject are those deemed necessary for the pro-
tection of the essential interests of this Govern-
ment and of the residents of the Zone.
Panamanian Labor
Item 1 of the United States undertakings in
the memorandum eanbodies certain agreements
reached with respect to the employment of Pana-
manian labor in the Zone. It was considered to
be in the interest of the United States, not only in
its relations with Panama but also in regard to
its position throughout Latin America, to elimi-
nate any appearance of discrimination in the treat-
August 1, 1955
187
ment of such labor. Such a policy is in accord
with the exchange of notes dated March 2, 1936,
ancillary to the 1936 General Treaty and with the
joint statement issued October 1, 1953, by the
Presidents of the United States and Panama.
Accordingly we have agreed, subject to the enact-
ment of the necessary legislation by the Congress,
to the establishment of a single basic wage level
for all employees in a given category regardless
of citizenship, with certain increments to be added
to the pay of a United States citizen employee ; to
uniform application of the Civil Service Retire-
ment Act to all United States and Panamanian
citizen employees of this Government in the Zone;
to equality of opportunity for Panamanian citi-
zens for employment in all United States Gov-
ernment positions in the Zone for which they are
qualified except where security considerations re-
quire the employment of United States citizens
only; and admission of Panamanian citizens to
participation in job training programs.
The executive branch considers that these agree-
ments mark a step forward in our relations with
Panama and that their approval is in the national
interest.
I, and other representatives of the interested
executive agencies, will be happy to respond to
any questions the committee may wish to ask
regarding the agreements.
Postponement of Hearings on
Organization for Trade Cooperation
White House press release dated July 15
The White House on July 15 made public the
following exchange of co-rrespondence between
the President and Congressman Jere Cooper,
Chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means
of the House of Representatives.
President Eisenhower to Congressman Cooper
July 15, 1955
Dear Mr. Chairman : I appreciate your July
fourteenth letter and readily understand your
problem of arranging adequate Committee con-
sideration of H. R. 5550 which would authorize
U.S. membership in the Organization for Trade
Cooperation. 1
The Committee on Ways and Means has borne
a heavy burden of difficult and constructive legis-
lation in this session of Congress. Much of that
constructive effort has been concerned with legis-
lation implementing various parts of the Admin-
istration's program in the field of foreign eco-
nomic policy.
More remains to be done in this field. As your
letter indicates, and as we recently discussed in
my office, the passage of H. R. 5550 is especially
important. This legislation will do much to
vouchsafe to the American people and the free
world the gains which will accrue from continua-
tion of the enlightened trade policy provided for
in H. R. 1. To assure orderly consideration of
trade problems arising between nations is vital to
our own interests as a great trading nation and to
the interests of those joined with us in the cause
of freedom. This great purpose will be power-
fully advanced by Congressional approval of the
proposed Organization for Trade Cooperation.
I share your view that it would be ill-advised to
launch consideration of H. R. 5550 in your Com-
mittee when so little time remains in this session.
A matter of this vital importance should have
thorough hearings, discussion and debate.
The wise course of action, therefore, it seems to
me, is the one you suggest in your letter. I am
pleased indeed to have your assurance that H. R.
5550 will be among the very first measures to be
considered by your Committee next year.
With kind regard,
Sincerely,
Dwight D. Eisenhower
The Honorable Jere Cooper
Chairman
Committee on Ways and Means
House of Representatives
Washington, D. C.
Congressman Cooper to President Eisenhower
July 14, 1955
Mt dear Mr. President : I am writing you in
reference to your message 2 and our recent personal
conversation relative to your request urging that
the Congress enact legislation authorizing United
1 For text of agreement on Organization for Trade
Cooperation, see Bulletin of Apr. 4, 1955, p. 579.
2 Ibid., Apr. 25, 1955, p. 678.
188
Department of Stale Bulletin
States membership in the Organization for Trade
Cooperation. As you know, pursuant to your
message I introduced H. R. 5550 on April 14, 1955,
which would carry out your request.
I agree with you that enactment of this legisla-
tion is of vital importance to the continued ex-
pansion of markets for our products abroad. I
am more aware of this due to the fact that I was
fortunate enough to have been chosen as one of
the Members of the Congress to attend the meet-
ings in Geneva last fall, when the participating
countries in the General Agreement on Tariffs and
Trade were working out the proposals for the
establishment of the Organization for Trade Co-
operation.
Due to the very heavy work load of our Com-
mittee and the necessity for the enactment of legis-
lation which you and your Administration have
requested regarding laws in which time elements
have been involved, as well as other legislation
which our Committee has considered, it appears
that there may not be time to give the full hear-
ings and consideration to this subject which it de-
serves before the adjournment of Congress. In
planning ahead for our Committee activities
around the first of July, I had listed hearings on
H. R. 5550 tentatively to begin on July 13. How-
ever, other Committee work demanded more of
our Committee time than I had originally ex-
pected.
Due to the prospect of an early adjournment of
the Congress and the necessity for ample notice
for hearings on the Organization for Trade Co-
operation legislation, it appears unlikely that
proper notice and consideration could be given at
this late date. Due to your so strongly urging
enactment of this legislation, I would appreciate
hearing from you your desire as to whether or not
we should try to proceed on the Organization for
Trade Cooperation legislation in the limited time
which remains in this session of the Congress.
I realize full well the extreme importance of this
legislation from the international point of view,
and it would be my intent, if you feel that full
hearings and consideration is necessary on this
legislation, to schedule it for consideration very
early in the next session of the Congress.
With my kindest personal regards and sincere
best wishes, I am
Very respectfully yours,
Jere Cooper
Agreement on Participation
of Belgian Forces in Korea
Press release 433 dated July 15
Acting Secretary of State Herbert Hoover, Jr.,
and Baron Silvercruys, Ambassador of Belgium,
on July 15 signed an agreement providing for the
settlement of Belgium's obligations for the logis-
tical support furnished by the United States to
the Belgian forces participating in the U.N. col-
lective action in Korea. The agreement provides
for reimbursement by Belgium in dollars upon
presentation of statements of account by the U.S.
Government.
The Belgian battalion arrived in Korea in
January 1951 and was soon pressed into combat,
where its gallantry contributed to the U.N. efforts
in the fight against Communist aggression. The
Belgian battalion together with the Luxembourg
detachment received a U.S. Distinguished Unit
Citation on November 1, 1951, for "outstanding
performance of duty and extraordinary heroism
in action against the enemy" on the Imjin River
during the period April 20-26, 1951. The citation
states: "The Belgian battalion and the Luxem-
bourg detachment displayed such gallantry, de-
termination, and esprit de corps in accomplish-
ing their missions under extremely difficult and
hazardous conditions as to set them apart and
above other units participating in the action."
TEXT OF AGREEMENT
Agreement Between the Government of the United
States of America and the Government of Belgium
Concerning Participation of the Belgian Forces in
United Nations Operations in Korea
This Agreement between the Government of the United
States of America (the executive agent of the United
Nations Forces in Korea) and the Government of Belgium
shall govern relationships in matters specified herein for
forces furnished by the Government of Belgium for the
operations under the Commanding General of the Armed
Forces of the Member States of the United Nations in
Korea (hereinafter referred to as "Commander") desig-
nated by the Government of the United States of America
pursuant to resolutions of United Nations Security
Council of June 25, 1950, June 27, 1950, and July 7, 1950.
ARTICLE 1
The Government of the United States of America agrees
to furnish the Belgian forces with available materials,
supplies, services, and facilities which the Belgian forces
will require for these operations, and which the Govern-
August 1, 7955
189
meut of Belgium is unable to furnish. The Government
of the United States of America and the Government of
Belgium will maintain accounts of materials, supplies,
services, and facilities furnished by the Government of the
United States of America to the Government of Belgium,
its forces, or agencies. Reimbursement for such materi-
als, supplies, services, and facilities will be accomplished
by the Government of Belgium upon presentation of state-
ments of account by the Government of the United States
of America. Such payment will be effected by the Govern-
ment of Belgium in United States dollars. Issues of ma-
terials and supplies to the Belgian forces will not operate
to transfer title to the Government of Belgium in advance
of reimbursement.
ARTICLE 2
Pursuant to Article 1, appropriate technical and admin-
istrative arrangements will be concluded between author-
ized representatives of the Government of the United
States of America and authorized representatives of the
Government of Belgium.
ARTICLE 3
Classified items, specialized items, or items in short sup-
ply furnished to the Government of Belgium by the Gov-
ernment of the United States of America will be returned
to the Government of the United States of America upon
request, as a credit against the cost of materials, supplies,
and services previously furnished. If the Government of
Belgium determines at the time of redeployment of its
forces that materials er supplies received from the Gov-
ernment of the United States of America hereunder are
not desired for retention, such materials or supplies may
be offered to the Government of the United States of Amer-
ica and, if accepted, their residual value as determined by
the Government of the United States of America will be
used as a credit against reimbursement for materials, sup-
plies, and services previously furnished.
ARTICLE 4
Each of the parties to this agreement agrees not to as-
sert any claim against the other party for injury or death
of members of its armed forces or for loss, damage, or
destruction of its property or property of members of its
armed forces caused in Korea by members of the armed
forces of the other party. Claims of any other Govern-
ment or its nationals against the Government or nationals
of the Government of Belgium or vice versa shall be a
matter for disposition between the Government of Belgium
and such third government or its nationals.
ARTICLE 5
The Government of Belgium will maintain accounts of
materials, supplies, services, and facilities furnished by
other governments to personnel or agencies of the Gov-
ernment of Belgium, either directly or through the Com-
mander. Settlement of any claim arising as a result of
the furnishing of such materials, supplies, services, and
facilities to the Government of Belgium by such third
governments, whether directly or through the Commander,
shall be a matter for consideration between such third
governments and the Government of Belgium.
ARTICLE 6
The requirements of the Belgian forces for Korean
currency will be supplied under arrangements approved
by the Commander; provided, however, that settlement
of any obligation of the Government of Belgium for use
of such currency will be a matter of consideration between
the Government of Belgium and the competent authori-
ties of Korea. If, with the approval of the Commander,
personnel and agencies of the Government of Belgium use
media of exchange other than Korean currency in Korea,
obligations arising therefrom will be a matter for con-
sideration and settlement between the Government of
Belgium and the other concerned governments.
ARTICLE 7
The Government of Belgium agrees that all orders,
directives, and policies of the Commander issued to the
Belgian forces or its personnel shall be accepted and car-
ried out by them as given and that in the event of dis-
agreement with such orders, directives, or policies, for-
mal protest may be presented subsequently.
ARTICLE 8
Nothing in this agreement shall be construed to affect
existing agreements or arrangements between the parties
for the furnishing of materials, supplies, services, or
facilities.
ARTICLE 9
This agreement shall come into force upon the date of
signature thereof, and shall apply to all materials, sup-
plies, services, and facilities furnished or rendered on,
before, or after that date, to all claims referred to in
Article 4 arising on, before, or after that date, and to
all technical and administrative arrangements concluded
pursuant to Article 2 on, before, or after that date.
In witness whereof, the undersigned, being duly au-
thorized by their respective governments, have signed this
agreement.
Done at Washington, in the English and French lan-
guages, the two texts having equal authenticity, this
fifteenth day of July, 1955.
FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES
OF AMERICA :
Herbert Hoover Jr.
FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF BELGIUM:
SlLVERCRUTS
Korea To Get 62 Used Streetcars
as Part of U.S. Aid Program
The International Cooperation Administration
announced on July 1 that about 62 used American
streetcars are to be purchased with U.S. aid funds
and sent to Korea as part of a $900,000 rehabilita-
190
Department of State Bulletin
tion of the street railway systems in Seoul and
Pusan. The project will also include purchases
of a wide variety of motors, generators, car shop
equipment, parts, and other supplies needed to
restore the Seoul and Pusan trolley systems.
Seoul has 30 miles of streetcar track and 135
serviceable streetcars, most of them from 30 to
40 years old. This is half the number of cars
operated before the Communist invasion of 1950,
but the number of passengers carried daily still
averages some 600,000 and is increasing. The
street railway system is the principal means of
transportation for Seoul's 2,000,000 population,
and block-long queues of men, women, and chil-
dren stand for long periods at trolley stops wait-
ing to crowd onto the antiquated cars.
Similar conditions exist in Pusan, a city of a
million people, where 110,000 persons daily ride
over 10 miles of tracks. Only 29 of Pusan's 79
cars are operable on an average day. Seventy
percent of Pusan's cars are at least 20 years old.
U. N. Command Cites Violations of Korean Armistice Agreement
Department of Defense press release dated July 11
Following is the verbatim text of a statement
made by Map Gen. Harlan C. Parks, USAF,
Senior Member of the United Nations Command
Military Armistice Commission, at the 60th meet-
ing of the Military Armistice Commission held
July 5, 1955:
A concept basic to the establishment and main-
tenance of the Armistice in Korea was that the
balance which existed between the military forces
of the opposing sides on July 27, 1953, would not
be altered thereafter by the opposing command-
ers through the introduction of reinforcing mili-
tary personnel or combat materiel. Provisions
for implementing this basic concept were clearly
spelled out in detail in paragraph 13 of the Arm-
istice Agreement. 1
Shortly after the signing of the Armistice it
became apparent to the United Nations Command
that the Korean People's Army and the Chinese
People's Volunteers were resorting to every pos-
sible subterfuge to avoid compliance with the
provisions of paragraphs 13 (c) and (d) of the
Armistice Agreement. Whereas the United Na-
tions Command submitted its first combat materiel
and personnel report as prescribed in paragraphs
13 (c) and (d) of the Armistice Agreement on 28
July 1953, the day following the signing of the
Armistice, it was not until 12 September 1953 that
1 For the text of the Armistice Agreement, see Bulletin
of Aug. 3, 1953, p. 132.
your side submitted its first report of rotation
personnel and not until 6 October 1953 that you
submitted your first combat materiel report.
Your first personnel report dated 12 September
1953 instead of reflecting actual arrivals and de-
partures merely listed 964 departures and no
arrivals for the 24-hour period of 15-16 Septem-
ber 1953. Apparently you would have the United
Nations Command and Neutral Nations Super-
visory Commission believe that from 28 July to 15
September, with a military force exceeding 1,200,-
000 men, the majority of whom came from Red
China, not one soldier arrived or left Korea during
that 7-week period.
Your first combat materiel report of 6 October
1953 reflected an outgoing shipment of four 57
mm. anti-tank guns with 20 rounds of ammuni-
tion, and it was not until 9 February 1954 that you
submitted your first legitimate combat materiel
report reflecting an incoming shipment — cover-
ing one 37 mm. AA gun. Again, you would ap-
parently have us believe that you could logistically
support your huge military force in war-torn and
ravaged North Korea for the entire first 6 months
of the Armistice without a single incoming ship-
ment.
That the United Nations Command has contin-
ued scrupulously to comply with provisions of 13
(c) and (d) is reflected in the following figures
taken from the official records covering the first
year of the Armistice. From 27 July 1953, to 31
July 1954, the United Nations Command submitted
August 7, 1955
191
370 personnel reports covering 287,343 permanent
arrivals and 362,122 departures. During this same
period the Korean People's Army and the Chinese
People's Volunteers side submitted only 42 reports
covering the ridiculous figures of 12,748 permanent
arrivals and 31,201 departures.
The United Nations Command during this pe-
riod submitted 1,057 combat materiel reports cov-
ering the movement of 9,717 combat aircraft, 1,034
armored vehicles, 194,385 weapons, and 386,828,087
rounds of ammunition.
The Korean People's Army and the Chinese
People's Volunteer side, on the other hand, sub-
mitted only 24 combat materiel reports covering
the movement of zero combat aircraft, 14 armored
vehicles, 1,848 weapons, and 746,500 rounds of
ammunition.
The United Nations Command established a sys-
tem and procedures to insure that all incoming
and outgoing combat materiel and personnel were
shipped only through designated ports of entry
and took necessary measures to facilitate free and
open inspections of these shipments by the Neutral
Nations inspection teams. The Korean People's
Army and the Chinese People's Volunteers, on the
other hand, established no such system or proce-
dures, failed to use your designated ports of entry,
and resorted to every conceivable pretext to cir-
cumvent the provisions of 13 (c) and (d). At-
tempts by the Swiss and Swedish members of the
Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission to carry
out their functions of inspection and observation
were effectively blocked by the Czechs and Poles.
Relative Merits of Inspection Systems
The relative merits of the inspection system es-
tablished in the South as compared with that
established in the North was the subject of consid-
erable discussion and deliberation by the Neutral
Nations Supervisory Commission.
In the 107th plenary session of the Neutral Na-
tions Supervisory Commission on 23 February
1954, General Wacker, the Senior Swiss Member,
made these observations :
In the South, rotation takes place every day and every
hour in all ports of entry with the exception of one,
whereas in the North some spare parts are shipped out
once a month through one or two ports of entry and then
introduced again a few weeks after. I have never heard
anything about rotation of aircraft, armored vehicles, or
even complete weapons and ammunition in the North. I
think we have the right to ask ourselves how it is possible
that an army counting several one hundred thousand sol-
diers can be logisticaUy supported by the amount of mate-
rial as shown by the figures which are being submitted to
us. ... in the South the teams control ... all
material being brought into Korea — a control which is be-
ing carried out, thanks to documents submitted by the
local authorities (load manifests, ship manifests) as well
as by means of inspections on the spot. I emphasize the
fact that in the South these documents and inspections
concern non-combat material as well as combat material.
In contrast to this, we find that in the North not more than
two to four inspections of spare parts of war material have
been carried out every month only in the ports of entry
of Sinuiju and Manpo.
General Mohn, the Senior Swedish Member of
the Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission, ob-
served that,
Gradually the teams in the South secured an insight
in the movements of all cargo in their respective ports
of entry. The Polish and Czechoslovakian members of
the teams were only too eager to inspect all sorts of
goods which did not even remotely have any connection
with combat material. They were not in the slightest
embarrassed by the restrictive interpretation of the arm-
istice agreement apparently held by their principals in
Panmunjom. . . . Well, what happened in the North?
As we all know, the teams in North Korea had to wait
an unusually long time before they found anything to
put their teeth in. They wandered about aimlessly in
their ports of entry, not knowing exactly what to do.
The airfield situation that existed in the terri-
tory under your control at the time the Armistice
Agreement was signed is well known by your side
as well as ours. All airfields under the control of
the Korean People's Army and the Chinese
People's Volunteers had been under continuous
attack and were inoperative. Photographs taken
by the United Nations Command on 27 July 1953
prove that on that date the Korean People's Army
and the Chinese People's Volunteers had no Air
Force and not one usable airfield. Our side has
presented these official photographs to the Neutral
Nations Supervisory Commission and the evidence
disclosed by them has never been challenged or
refuted.
Within a few months after the Armistice
Agreement was signed our radar surveillance de-
tected continuously increasing jet aircraft activity
in the territory occupied by the Korean People's
Army and the Chinese People's Volunteers side.
Such radar detection was irrefutable proof of your
violation of paragraph 13 (d).
On 21 September 1953 this evidence was fur-
ther confirmed when Senior Lieutenant Ro Kum
Suk, a Korean People's Army and the Chinese
192
Department of State Bulletin
People's Volunteers pilot officer who deserted
from the Korean People's Army and the Chinese
People's Volunteers side, landed at a Kepublic of
Korea airport and surrendered a MIG-15 combat
aircraft which had been illegally introduced into
Korean People's Army and the Chinese People's
Volunteers territory in defiance of paragraph 13
(d) of the Armistice Agreement. This pilot
offered irrefutable proof that from 27 July 1953
until 21 September 1953 he was engaged in the air
movement of MIG-15 aircraft. These combat
planes were introduced into the territory under
the military control of your side subsequent to
the signing of the Armistice Agreement and in
direct and willful violation thereof. This pilot
had personally observed at least 80 combat air-
craft that were brought into the territory of your
side contrary to paragraph 13 (d).
Series of Official Protests
Faced by this serious development and possessed
with irrefutable evidence, the United Nations
Command, on 12 October 1953, lodged its first
official protest against the Korean People's Army
and the Chinese People's Volunteers for violating
the provisions of paragraph 13 (d) of the Armis-
tice Agreement by the illegal introduction of air-
craft into the territory under your control. The
United Nations Command requested the Neutral
Nations Supervisory Commission to conduct an
investigation on an airfield near Uiju, where such
aircraft were definitely known to be located. De-
spite the attempts of your Czech and Pole mem-
bers on the Neutral Nations Supervisory Commis-
sion to forestall this investigation, the Neutral
Nations Supervisory Commission finally agreed to
dispatch a mobile inspection team, but due to
collusion between the Czech and Pole members
of the mobile inspection team with the Korean
People's Army and the Chinese People's Volun-
teers military representatives at the scene of the
investigation, you were successful in thwarting
any realistic investigation. Documents requested
by the Swiss and Swede members of the team were
refused on grounds that they were secret, requests
by Swiss and Swede members to conduct inspec-
tions at the railroad station and other shipping
points around the Uiju airfield were denied, and
visual observations of the Uiju airfield were care-
fully restricted and controlled to insure that the
team would observe no incriminating evidence.
Based upon new and additional evidence of your
continued secret Air Force build-up, on 9 Febru-
ary 1954, the United Nations Command lodged
its second official protest against your illegal in-
troduction of combat aircraft. A letter was dis-
patched to the Neutral Nations Supervisory Com-
mission outlining our charges and requesting that
mobile inspection teams be dispatched to conduct
special observations, inspections, and investiga-
tions at the following airfields: Pyong-Ni,
Taechon, Pyongyang East, Uiju, Pyongyang
Main, Sinuiju Northeast, Wonsan, Saamcham,
and Sunan, as well as road and rail by-passes in
the vicinity of the ports of entry of Sinuiju,
Chongjin and Manpo.
Although the Swiss and Swedish members of
the Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission were
in favor of dispatching the requested mobile in-
spection teams, the action was blocked by the veto
power of your Polish and Czech comrades, and
the investigation was thereby prevented. Previ-
ously, General Bures, Czechoslovak, on 29 Janu-
ary 1954, had summed up the attitudes always
taken by the Czech and Polish members in regard
to United Nations Command requests for inves-
tigations when he said, "All accusations against
the Korean People's Army and the Chinese Peo-
ple's Volunteers side are nothing but groundless
fabrications. . . ." Later, 10 February 1954, Colo-
nel Bibrowski, Polish member, in speaking of a
United Nations Command request for a mobile
inspection team, states, "The Polish delegation
cannot agree to consider such a request and in no
case is it ready to comply with it."
From the actions of your side and the actions
of your unneutral Czech and Pole representation
in the Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission
on this and the previous United Nations Command
protest it became obvious that any realistic neutral
inspection of your illegal activities was virtually
impossible. Although the United Nations Com-
mand was cognizant throughout the following
year of your continued illegal Air Force build-up,
it was not until you overtly employed your ille-
gally amassed air power on 5 February 1955 by
making an unprovoked attack against United Na-
tions Command aircraft on a routine training mis-
sion over international waters that the United
Nations Command lodged another protest against
your side. 2
2 Ibid., Mar. 14, 1955, p. 426.
August I, 1955
193
In the Military Armistice Commission negoti-
ations on this incident you inadvertently admitted
that your own MIG aircraft participated in this
air battle. This admission constituted conclusive
corroboration of your illegal introduction of com-
bat aircraft, of not making the proper combat ma-
teriel reports and of by-passing the designated
ports of entry, all in violation of the Armistice
Agreement.
The third official protest against your illegal in-
troduction of combat materiel was therefore made
by the United Nations Command on 21 February
1955. Again the complaint was spelled out in
detail.
The United Nations Command charges that the Korean
People's Army and the Chinese People's Volunteers have
between the dates of 27 July 1953 and 5 February 1955
introduced into the territory under the military control
of their side combat aircraft of the MIG type, arms, and
ammunition therefor, in excess of combat aircraft of
the MIG type, arms, and ammunition therefor in the
territory under the military control of the Korean People's
Army and the Chinese People's Volunteers side on 27 July
1953, and have failed to report them in the prescribed
manner and form to the Neutral Nations Supervisory
Commission, in violation of paragraph 13 (d) and other
provisions of the Armistice Agreement.
Again the United Nations Command requested a
mobile inspection team investigation of six air-
fields where your illegally introduced MIG air-
craft were known to be based. Again your Czech
and Pole cohorts on the Neutral Nations Super-
visory Commission ably represented your side and
successfully stalled the dispatch of the mobile in-
spection teams for one week, enabling you to fly
your MIG's away from the bases to be investigated
and otherwise remove or hide incriminating evi-
dence. That most of your MIG's were flown out
was irrefutably established by our radar surveil-
lance. When the mobile inspection teams reached
your airfields, every effort of the Swiss and Swede
members to make full and impartial investigations
was thwarted by the Czech and Polish members,
just as they had thwarted the investigation of
Uiju in October 1953. Although the official re-
ports submitted by these teams reveal that at least
88 MIG's were observed on those fields, the Czechs
and Poles vetoed requests by the Swiss and Swedes
for available documents which could have estab-
lished the dates when those aircraft were brought
into the territory under your control. It is sig-
nificant to note that these documents were the
same type documents that were freely offered by
194
the United Nations Command side to mobile in-
spection teams operating in the South.
On 10 May 1955 again your illegally introduced
aircraft made an unprovoked attack against
United Nations Command aircraft on a routine
training mission over international waters. On
13 May 1955 the United Nations Command lodged
a strong letter of protest against the Korean
People's Army and the Chinese People's Volun-
teers for this hostile act and for the fourth time
charged your side with illegally introducing
combat aircraft in violation of the Armistice
Agreement. 3
An analysis of the official reports submitted by
the United Nations Command and the Korean
People's Army and the Chinese People's Volun-
teers covering combat materiel shipments for the
period 28 July 1953 to 31 May 1955, reflects the
following :
The United Nations Command has submitted
1,969 combat materiel reports, covering movement
of 16,141 combat aircraft, 2,492 armored vehicles,
447,803 weapons, and 608,386,231 rounds of
ammunition.
The Korean People's Army and the Chinese
People's Volunteers has submitted 162 combat ma-
teriel reports, covering the movement of zero com-
bat aircraft, 245 armored vehicles, 144,808 weap-
ons, and 50,674,619 rounds of ammunition. I
repeat, in the first 22 months of the Armistice,
despite the fact that you have twice openly em-
ployed your illegally acquired combat aircraft in
large numbers in hostile and unwarranted attacks
against the United Nations Command, your side
has not yet submitted the report covering the
movement of combat aircraft in or out of Korea.
Evidence Provided by Defectors
At approximately 1315 hours 21 June 1955,
Senior Lieutenant Lee Un Yong, pilot, and
Junior Lieutenant Lee In Son, navigator, both
members of the Korean People's Armed Forces
Air Force, after defecting from your side and
leaving Pyongyang Main airfield, landed at Seoul
airbase and surrendered a YAK-18 aircraft to our
side. These men have also surrendered them-
selves and have asked for asylum from the tyranny
and abuse they suffered under your control. This
has been granted. Moreover, they have offered to
'Ibid., May 30, 1955, p. 891.
Department of State Bulletin
make their full contribution toward the defeat of
your iniquitous conspiracy.
Your side will recognize their names. They
are men who have held positions of high trust
and responsibility in your forces. Senior Lieu-
tenant Lee, the pilot, had served 8 years and 6
months in your armed forces. He graduated
from the Air Academy in Chkalov, U. S. S. R.,
and the Air Officers' School in Yenchi, Man-
churia. Your side has rewarded him with the 3d
Class Order of the National Flag Medal, 2d Clas9
Order of the National Flag Medal, 2d Class Free-
dom and Independence Medal, Air Merit Medal.
Senior Lieutenant Lee was a member of the
Korean People's Armed Forces Air Force, 858th
Independent Night-Bomber Regiment.
Junior Lieutenant Lee In Son has served in
your forces for 4 years and 9 months. His serv-
ices have been rewarded by the presentation of
the Merit Medal. He was a member of the
Korean People's Armed Forces Air Force, 858th
Independent Night-Bomber Regiment.
Senior Lieutenant Lee, the pilot of the YAK-18
aircraft, was stationed at Pyongyang Main air-
field from July 1953 until September 1954 and
again from February 19